but they are right though. people just hate to jump on the hate bandwagon the game is pretty decent. but people just have such high expectations and no own opinions that they just hate for no reason
It's always been this. There was a group of people who genuinely hated Skyrim and thought it was trash. What were we told? "Keep playing it gets better." "You're playing it wrong." The one key difference between Skyrim's core gameplay loops and Starfield's is that Skyrim at least got world-crafting and exploration right, Starfield didn't. And that's also the straw that broke the camel's back because world-crafting and exploration are *precisely* what sustained Skyrim and FO4 in the public's eyes despite people growing more accepting of how flawed the games are over the years. Those core gameplay systems though...? They were stale 13 years ago and they're stale now. It's only getting worse. The "you need at least 800 hours before the game gets going" crowd is just the most denialist fanboys of the community who desperately want an out to shield the game from criticism with.
@@savagememes873 for no reason? Aww no.. please don’t get me started!! How many reasons would you like? I’ve easily got to 30 good reasons why Starfield is awful. I’m not a hater, either. I love Oblivion, Skyrim and Fallout 4, I’m BGS’s dream fan come to life … if they re-released Skyrim tomorrow for £70 I’d buy it without thinking twice because I love the game. I don’t love Starfield because it’s a rotten, flawed game.
Being a Bethesda fanboy and playing Starfield is like having an alcoholic deadbeat dad show up for Christmas one year to gift you a 6 pack of tube socks from Walmart then pass out on the couch
I’m a Bethesda fan boy but idk man… them games ain’t got the same spark as fallout4 and new Vegas anymore… :( I was hyped for starfield but the worlds seem empty ass hell
Bethesda lost all credibility with me when they said they couldn't increase the stash size in FO76 because of technical limitations, and then we discovered the technical limitation is "you have to pay a monthly subscription fee."
bethesda had little credibility to begin with, with me. Didn't play its games but had a laugh at its bugs compilations on youtube. TBH I laughed at Gothic bugs, but somehow its part of the game and I like it :)
With me it was the writing/story in fallout 4. Bethesda straight up told their main writer to not put effort into it because players "won't care anyways". They've completely lost the plot.
But in a game that alleges scale, does spending a significant amount of time in it not provide you with the perspective that something isn't really that good? If someone played for 10 hours and said it's trash it will be less valuable than someone who spent 60 hours to really get to know the game and tell me it's bad.
Me: Hey, this food tastes terrible... Bethesda: Try eating it out of a different bowl! Use a plastic spoon instead, you'll feel like you're eating an entirely different meal!
Remember how in Spore, players could create creatures and share them? They should make a space game where players can make their own planets, and then submit them for other users to review and share- and the game should populate users galaxies with the top user rated ones
The game you are looking for is called Space Engineers. Craft-able planets, ships, bases, outposts. Actual ships you build yourself and fly, from the planets surface into space, with orbital physics etc. Not a single loading screen.
Bethesda successfully gaslighted people into thinking that you have to play 10 hours, 100 hours, 200 hours in bad game before you can say the game is bad.
It happens, on occasion. FF14 was for me a good example of "gets good after ~50 hours", but that's a lot of hours and the only reason I went through it was because I trusted my friends. It had free trial at least, so I could suffer though the slog that's early game for free and only pay for it when I decided that I do enjoy the game. It shouldn't be that way though. Again, 50h is a long time. Hells, even 10h is a long time. A lot of good games can be finished in 10 hours, do I have to play them ten times to decide that they were good? If you need 10+ hours to say if a game is bad then I want to be able to have my money back after 10 hours of playing if it's turns out to be bad. If you need 200h to tell how good or bad the game is, then I don't want to pay for those 200h, thank you very much. If you are lucky, you may have ~400,000 hours to live (not including sleep), out of which half will be school and work (again, if you are lucky). They want you to spend hundreds of hours deciding if a game is good but you have to pay for it in advance, lol.
If you don’t play it enough, you’re not allowed to say it’s bad. If you play it past a certain point, you can’t say it’s bad because you MUST have enjoyed it to play long enough. It’s like a paradox you’re just never allowed to say it’s bad
If a game is well designed it will hook you in the first few minutes. If you made a game thats boring for an entire hour, that's pathetic and no one should be playing it
I knew this was going to happen when Bethesda claimed there would be "1000 planets" huge red flag, alot of people dont understand how hard it would be to handcraft 1000 planets. I've been saying from the very beginning I'd rather have 3 or 4 detailed planets than 1000 boring ones
Somehow Spore managed to make their space stage with decent replayability 15 years ago. You can have 1000 planets, just make the available minigames sandboxey enough for players to enjoy long enough before they notice it's a chore.
Starfield is the proof that we need to change our "biggest map" definition now from "theoretical size" to "walkable space that doesn't include empty space"
Good point. "Here's my new game that's 10,000 times larger than Starfield, but it's just two rooms that you teleport between.....but they're really far away from each other, trust me."
@@sydhamelin1265 We all should have seen this coming after Skyrim, which is well known for being as wide as an ocean and as deep as a puddle. They just took that even further. Make it as wide as the universe, and as deep as...
@@TheOnlyGhxst And that's the crux of the problem. If you're playing Starfield for sci-fi RPG, games like Mass Effect, and even Outer Worlds, are leagues ahead. For open world space exploration? No Man's Sky, Elite Dangerous, Eve Online, leagues ahead. Starfield doesn't excel at anything, and it feels a decade behind the times.
So tired of locked/ empty buildings in open world/ survival games. Huge map, but only half or less is actually accessible. Cyberpunk is this huge vertical city, but you really only explore horizontally with a few exceptions. I'm an explorer... nowhere to go in starfield.
Funny thing is that even in Skyrim the enemy humanoids have more variety on them. The afflicted can just puke acid on you instead of just swinging a blade, the falmer have insects to annoy you and the forsworn have exposed hearts that you can steal and outright insta kill them. Even as limited by its engine as Skyrim was, it still managed to be brilliantly unique and varied.
Yeah, Skyrim made the hype for Starfield bigger, so they did not need to make a real game in order to sell insane amount of copies, before players realized it was a scam.
Not to mention skyrim actually makes you feel like you a part of a large and thribing world, complete with an afterlife and strange eldritch dimensions. AND skyrim is just a part Nirn which is much, much bigger and any older fan of the elder scrolls know this. When you simply compare the scale of skyrim landscape vs empty sphere number 5 that we call planet, the winner is obvious.
That was pre-ESG and DEI...you can't champion those things and expect anything good to come from a company, bc they aren't hiring the best, they are checking boxes, in both the imagined world, and the real world...
Love how it pads the gameplay loop by always landing you 500 yards from POIs and making you WALK. Like your character made a conscious decision to waste time after mandatory fast travel loading screens.
@@SonGoku5363you can't even fly your ship. Imagine the COD tank missions. Then imagine the connection those had to the infantry missions, and you've already got a better connected world than Starfield.
yikes , i just started looking it up after i made that comment. I was expecting it to be no mans sky type of flying/exploration but its just docking at a station > loading screens lol i absolutely HATE that about space games. That shit was okay in 2008 but now its just embarrassing @@ICCUWANSIUT
This!! I literally felt like they were trying to waste my time, and it was infuriating.. I don't wanna "land" at the location and still be FORCED to run!
Not sure why it lands you FAR away from where you want to go SOMETIMES. Most time, this is HARDLY the case but in the most rural side quests like looking for a cave or rural outpost or something. But it's actually typical, landscapes like that are DIFFICULT to land a 700 meter ship at- you may need to touch down 1/2 a mile from where your heading. Missions in cities or more developed places tend to have landing pads or places you can land closer nearby. I hope they put landing vessels/ shuttle craft in that can put you a few meters from your destination instead, in the future.
I can't help but to feel this is sort of like having to explain your Halloween costume. Like at this point I don't really care how good it is after you explain it, if you couldn't make it clear from the start and communicate it to the player effectively, you still failed, dumdums.
I've also received a comment but I'm fairly sure it's written by AI, not an actual person. It didn't understand the comment thoroughly and offered non-solutions to my critic.
*"The game isn't bad. You are."* -words NO gaming company should ever say to a player, even a dissatisfied one. Fans can say it, but the developers and anyone who worked on it should let the game speak for them.
The moment I saw first gameplay trailer and after literally 15 seconds when I saw pixelated 2d sprites of smokes from spaceship engines I knew that there's little if no hope. And yeah, Todd Howard basically didn't lied to us. What he showed is what we got.
The general problem with Starfield is the things NPCs asked you to do would only make sense in a medieval setting. Those "talk to [person]" quests where you travel to another planet, talk to [person], and travel back to the 1st planet, would only make sense in a future where phones somehow don't exist.
For me it was the crowd thing. Did you see the AngryJoeShow review of the game? You know the saying of how once you see certain things, you can't UNsee them? My thing was the crowds in Starfield. In CP 2077 I shoot a gun in the street (not necessarily AT anyone), & the crowd around me runs away in fear & maybe the cops show up. I do the same thing in Starfield & nothing happens. Folks are saying the loading screens take them out of the games immersion, for me it's the crowds non-reaction to things you do.
How would a phone call connect to another planet reliably? I think this would a thing that would actually be required if we lived across multiple galaxies, especially if you didn't want the call to be intercepted.
@@StoganNZYou realize the signals that we use for cell phones on Earth now would still work in space we would just need to set up fucking relays to send the messages. Yes there would be a delay between messages so you wouldn't be able to have an actual like phone call. But there is absolutely no reason you would have to send a person across the Galaxy to talk to someone and then send them back to yourself. That makes absolutely no sense. Also every mode of communication that we have is easily interceptible. So you talking about being worried about privacy is ridiculous considering the fact that we don't have any already.
On his point of the engine, Laurian has used a contract of the same creation engine from Oblivion for BG3 they worked on since DivinityOS1. The difference is they have IMPROVED the engine on their end! You can see the effort in their cinematics, textures and models. My god the character model difference between BG3 and Starfield is night and day and they are based on the same engine!
Its really the difference between an up and coming studio passionate about its work and respectful to its customers, and a well established studio coasting off its past reputation and seeking to cash in on unweary customers.
Larian uses their own inhouse engine for their games, divinity engine, at the very least for the last 10 years or so. Source: RL friend worked there the last 10 years.
I like how Todd had to sit through 3,5hrs of the Game Awards and wasn't given a single one for this piece of shit, that's literally worse than everything Bethesda has ever made.
a game available for one console, thats mostly rehashing everything from the first game with slightly better graphics isn't really mindblowing frl @@Alucard171
@@Alucard171how come? They didn’t win anything and it wasn’t a life changing game but at least that game is pretty well received and it has a 92% on metacritic from players starfield is a 60% game and everyone shits on it lol
@@Ar17778AC6 genuinely deserves it. Fromsoft never ceases to disappoint. The Japanese way of creating games is soooo much different than the American way.
1:24 It is still CRAZY to me how hard game reviewers/journalists/podcasters were trying to avoid saying negative things about Starfield before it was "safe" to do so. Go back and look at the initial wave of post-launch coverage. Listen to them desperately talk wide circles around the game's shortcomings and put a nervous spin on all of its flaws. Starfield has made me more cynical about games media than any other game in the past decade.
theyre 100% bought and paid for..same as movie reviewers. Criticise and your company doesnt get ad money. And you dont get flown out to conventions and recieve free games etc
@@msventurelli They most definitely are paid off lmfao. It was proven earlier this year. They get paid anywhere from $50-100 per positive review. They don't give 2 fucks about the consumers. They just want to line their pockets
Because Journalists aren't really the bastion of free speech and press they should be. If you want to be black-pilled about it, a combination of corporate and social interests preclude most journalists from being able to speak their mind from fear of being cut off from the teat of advertising, being able to interview, etc. You just can't stray too far from the approved corporate narrative that has been agreed upon as safe otherwise you affect the bottom line. It's gotten so bad most places just hire people willing to censor themselves and tow the line. It's not really fixable. Social systems just shift the pressure from the corporate narrative to the state narrative. Independent journalism gives you freedom, but you're a lot more vulnerable.
I just can't believe that Bethesda finally had the chance, in over 20 years, to make something that wasn't either Elder Scrolls or Fallout related, and THIS is what they settled with
They shouldn't make anything that isn't TES or fallout though. And they sure as hell should have not chose a space game. They lost their minds releasing crap like starfield into a realm of games like warframe, star citizen, mass effect trilogy, and destiny.
I have 141 hours into the game. I beat the main quest in the first 48 hours and then grinded the main story running through every single artifact collection mission until I restarted the story 10 times in a row to get the final armor. There has never been a game that has required so much work for so little reward. There is absolutely no point beating the main quest more than once.
There is a bit of truth to that. Though "bad" is not accurate. Starfield is deeply flawed, like a gem dipped in shit. For some reason Bethesda refuses to wash off the shit and wants to leave that to modders.
@@captainpandabear1422But that's the thing, it's not a gem, you can smear all the shit around and eat it, you will not find a gem in there. Skyrim was a great sandbox for modders. It was more than good enough to attract hoards of people even as the base game. I played Daggerfall, and can say that it looks like they thought you know what let's combine the worst of all our games, let us make a procedurally generated game with tons of loading screens, and those loading screens load nothing but, and while we are at it, let's use the most dumbed down rpg system without any custom spells and features, and how about making 10 steps back regarding combat while we are at it, let's just make 2 guns and reskin them 500 times. Oh, I almost forgotten, don't let us forget to make the least interesting stories, remove enemy variety, let us make the game with "high graphical fidelity"™ but let's make the characters look hideous and uncanny so they are an insult to the people they are modeled after! Enough of my rant. I don't expect that modders will save the game, there are better games there. Yes, even Skyrim. There were a lot of reasons to switch from Oblivion to Skyrim but there is nothing Starfield brings to the table.
Bethesdas ego thought they could handle multiple ips at once when they can’t even release a bug free stable game once a decade. No hope for es6. Starfield was a massive waste of the past decade+ to satiate their egos. Which would’ve been fine if it was fucking good
People been saying Bethesda has been on the decline since Skyrim (because compared to morrowind, Skyrim doesn’t have a lot of roleplay, too much handholding, dumbing down of skills/experience/quests). Where tf yall been at?
"The real life astronauts probably weren't bored on the moon, therefore our aggressively mediocre and empty game isn't boring" is probably the silliest argument I've ever heard. 😂
When I play Kerbal Space Program, the planets are barren but I’m engaged because the process of getting to another planet is a huge challenge. The real life astronauts were in a more extreme version of that. When you can fast travel to a planet, it kind of removes the interesting bits.
That was the wildest effing "argument". How detached from reality do you think your playerbase is Bethesda? You know the big difference between real life astronauts and in-game ones? REAL LIFE!
@@_Just_John landing a ship is not probably the greatest challenge. IMHO docking is far more difficult and dangerous. To your crew and the crew on the other ship or station.
Going back to 2003 and playing Star Wars Galaxies, I really felt small and insignificate exploring the 'original' planets (up to 100 sq miles) before speeders were added and before SoE added the 'themepark' planets. There is no way in hell that Starfield in 2023 (20 years later) can even come close to recreating that feeling. And there was a lot more to do on all the planets.
Knowing that as a Gunslinger/Musician/Trader I knew there was rare minerals on Dathomir, and that roaming rancors were around there was actually nerve wracking. Always watching all around as I dropped the Medium Harvesters, then racing back to the Star port were awesome times. From what I’ve seen, Starfiled has nothing to match that visceral feeling of helplessness I felt then.
@@dextokuyasu Yep, as a MCH and Scout I would spend so much time out in the wilds camping, hunting down rares to tame and meat, etc. to sell to crafters. Heard rumor that SoE dumbed down the game mechanics/classes etc. due to the complexity of maintaining such code. Not sure if that was one of the reason for making it WoW in space. One would think they could recreate in2023 what made it special instead of all these pretty looking but simplistic MMO/RPGs (exclude BG3).
@@mughug9616unfortunately the audience for this type of game sis no there anymore. I didn't play SWG but I loved Ultima Online and Lineage 2 (less similar, but very political - open world FFA PvP, clans, alliances, rivalries, sabotage, betrayal and so on).
Agree and love it. Just comparing a game 10 years older then Starfield and how little some so-called space games with planets to explore (and do something) have developed. :(@@Cessna172SNavIII
I was so blown away by Daggerfall and Morrowind. No other company was making games like this. That's the basis of love for their games, and the rest of the catalogue slowly leeched it out of me over the last 15 years or so
I've complained about how much they dumbed down the experience in Oblivion, Skyrim and Fallout 4 but they've gone off the deep end with this one, Starfield is just so devoid of actual content unlike their old games.
Daggerfall and Morrowind was innovative, daring, highly inspired and had masses of passion within it. It slowly bled away with each release, But Fallout 3, oblivion and Skyrim was all fantastic games, no doubt about that. Fallout 4 was controversial but still a brilliant game that I enjoyed. But this has just fallen so far now. It's empty, it's devoid of passion and creativity, it's UI is awful. It's just plain and boring. It's a mediocre game at best but for a Bethesda game it is utterly terrible and very worrying for ES6
@JudgeBreddUK Bethesda is the king of marketing games that aren’t RPGs in any traditional sense as traditional RPGs. That may be a large chunk of why every Bethesda game seems somewhat underwhelming to me. I want more games like Kenshi where it’s an open ended story you craft where you could just kill every faction leader and create chaos if you want.
If Starfields caves and labs are engaging gameplay, then Elden Rings caves and catacombs are masterpieces of game design that should be studied and used as a baseline for what side content looks like.
@@Deadsnake989 true they were really good. I was just comparing Elden rings because those were admittedly a bit of a slog, but nowhere near as repetitive and empty as starfield.
@@bediahvandougaljones I picked up on what you were saying. I just wanted to comment about how well I thought Remnant 2 did as an example of really good design. Honestly I thought the ER dungeons were alright for the most part, aside from a few exceptions that were awful. Your initial comment was spot on though. Elden Ring's dungeons, even the bad ones, are masterpieces when compared to Starfield dungeons. There was one repeatable Starfield dungeon I did find cool though, the research tower. I thought it was well designed because it focused around a central hub area, that was a fun combat arena. As you progressed through the POI, that central area would have new doors open and new enemies flooded in. It got annoying seeing it literally 5 times in the same star system. But out of all the dungeons in that game, it's the only one I didn't hate running for loot. Mainly because it was so short.
If starfields labs and caves are engaging gameplay then Bloodbornes Chalice dungeons is the pinnacle of gaming and all games should have chalice dungeons. A lot of chalice dungeons. Maybe in the future bethesda will release a game that is only chalice dungeons strung together with no end.
I always found ME1 exploration to be super chill and atmospheric. There were a couple of real pain in the ass planets but I also could’ve been less stubborn about driving directly up mountains.
@@spiraljumper74 the general atmosphere and different vibes of a lot of the planets honestly kept me invested even despite the “wasteland” criticism. And not to mention there was always something interesting on most of those worlds that made the investment worth it.
As a programmer, I can't blame the creation engine for feature or design problems. So many people assume that if it was made in unreal or unity it would fix missing features, or bad design decisions. Too many people think that a different engine would allow seamless space-planet traversal, but here is the thing, that is not a native feature for any engine. Hello Games had to develop that feature for No Man's Sky, if Bethesda is not willing to put in the time it won't happen. A different engine won't change the bad design decision such as poor UI design (which was mostly fixed by mods immediately after release). Or the incomplete combat design (I know it was designed by a different studio but it was not integrated well). Or the skill tree design, which locked players out from activities by having too many requirements on top of a leveling system and tree. I can go on. I haven't even touched on the story or the amount of content made for the procedural generator to place.
Yeah and the issues with the creation engine is not that it was first built decades ago, the problem is that the continuous development hasn't been enough. It has huge technical debt which seemingly there's no interest to address. But it's their engine, they're the experts on it, they can develop the features they need assuming they have the resources to do so. But ultimately the engine is not what makes a game good or bad.
"The bugs are better than the story" It's actually funny how true this is, my companion I would take him with me and the bugs kept getting worse and I made the inside joke to my friends that the space demons were possessing my companion and getting more and more control of him as the bugs got worse 🤣🤣 I found my companions possession story more compelling than any of the quest I did
I remember when people use to complain about those who would only play a game for a few hours and criticize a game. They would instantly be shouted down for not experiencing the full package. Now we got people putting in dozens of hours and criticizing the game and now being accused of being delusional.
Well, damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you've got only a couple hours, it's like, "You've barely played the game! You can't criticize it, shut up!" while if you've got a few hundred, it's, "You played the game that much and you're telling other people not to play it?? LOL! What a clown!" People on Steam are just brainless, at the end of the day. If I ever want to feel a little better about my own intelligence, all I have to do is open a popular game's review page and look at the comments on a negative review, lol
Starfield, a realistic depiction of space and the emptiness of it. True immersion. The ultimate experience. You will feel like you're actually in empty space, everywhere you go.
Only this is not a real space. This is a game that should be interesting and exciting. And I’m sure that a real flight to boring, deserted, dull Mars would be a thousand times more exciting than a trip to Mars in Starfield.
Theres allready a HumanBase or a Cave with a Human Treasure in it on every Planet😂What the Peopel mean with Empty in StarField ..is more like Empty Emersion ...Zero Emersion for an SpaceThemed RPG full of Wannabe Realism ....it starts with Water and Face Physics..and ends with shooting with a PumpGun inside a SpaceShip 😂Feel the Emptyness of an RPG when it just play like a weak LootShooter with LoadingScreens for every Door..to load more Emptiness of BugTester "GameDesgin "Idias.
That's a HUGE problem with a lot of dialogue tags, is that they take you down a cul-de-sac, and the conversation will never start, or end, differently, regardless of the tags you have. I think that's one reason BG3 got so huge, is that your dialogue tags can result in entirely different gameplay.
Cyberpunk also had some dynamic dialogue situations and your perks, abilities and experience points actually mattered. If you were way too overpowered in terms of strength, enemies could get intimidated and run away. I entered some cafe and a robbery encounter happened, I flexed my tech to the 3 robbers and they dipped LMAO. 🤣
@@ivanaleksandartsanev1693 It's funny because I usually don't compare CP77 to Starfield, because it's just too unfair heh. While it had a rough launch CP77 now feels like one of the more cutting edge current gen games, while Starfield feels like an old last gen. So the game I usually compare it to is the AA title, Outer Worlds, and even Outer Worlds had dialogue with real consequence. And skill based options. I also loved that you could alter your reputation based on those choices, so you may opt to use a skill based dialogue, but you know you'll still be hurting your reputation with a faction. And again, that's a AA game from 5 years ago. With CP77, they're just not even in the same league. Conversations have such a different flow in CP77, you know, they feel real. Not just someone always standing at attention, giving you a blank stare. I also love the little details, like when you first meet Evelyn at Lizzie's, when you approach the bar, she's talking with Judy, who then leaves, and this is all before you even know who either of them are. That's immersion.
@@sydhamelin1265 Or the first time seeing Panam and Nash in the Afterlife, without knowing the story. Meeting all the different characters like Rogue, all with different personalities, vibes and like you said, encounters always feeling natural. CP2077 came at the worst time in my opinion, because I personally don't remember such a weird time for technology, having very old and very new-gen tech at the same time and trying to cater to everyone, which is literally impossible. If they had discarded old-gen, the game would have never had such a bad release, in my opinion.
@@ivanaleksandartsanev1693 Yeah, that's another really great moment. It speaks to why the game is worth replaying over and over. And definitely good point about the timing. Releasing a game during a gen upgrade is going to be impossible to please both sides.
Yeah Larian does dialogue tags mattering well. Heck divinity 2 you can’t even Ally with the void unless you are undead so you just can’t get that ending if you chose to be a female lizard because you wanted to flirt with that one guard
Starfield's infuriating lack of roleplay options and choice-based outcomes is so weird because its NG+ system is explicitly designed for replaying the game with choice variance. However, because there's almost no roleplaying options nor choice-based outcomes that change anything, there's no reason to go to NG+ because there's nothing different to do or choose.
I'm not attempting to justify anything, but I think what happened is that because Skyrim was carried so far with the mod community that they were hoping that whatever they did the users would just keep it running indefinitely. A sandbox is only good if it has the toys to play in it.
@@aesop2733Skyrim had a lot of problems but it was commercially successful because they watered down the rpg elements so much from previous games that anyone could play it. This is just them continuing that trend to an extreme level
there is ton of roleplay options though... and decisions that have consequences... maby not in the actual campaign quest but other quests do. it proves my point about how none of you actually play the game and just jump on bandwagons
I finished Starfield's main story and a load of side quests into new game plus 3 or 4 on two characters. The dev comment about it being different and better is pure gaslighting. Starfield makes Fallout 4 look like a masterpiece. I'm glad I got access via Game Pass.
Which is insane bc Obsidian is legitimately such a strong studio, it blows my mind they weren’t involved with either Starfield OR Fo4. Both games would’ve been better 😭
Ive been saying for 10 years Bethesda needs to give Fallout to Obsidian to make and just help with technically stuff if anything while Bethesda studios just focus on TES with some help from Obsidian to implement RPG stuff. I think TES 6 is doomed unless they either get a new engine and or go back to their roots about 25 years. @@compostsmurf5519
Dialogue choice in Tyranny: Sparta kick an enemy off of the top of a tower, to their death. Dialogue choice in The Elder Slop: Jedi mind tricks, +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1
asmon hit the nail on the head at the end here. exactly what i've been saying for years. its the ppl that went thru "game design school" with 0 actual creative ability that have turned gaming into what it is today.
I don't think that's completely true. When you have hundreds of people working on a single product you end up with a sort of auteur project where a small handful of project leads provide a vision for everyone else to follow, and while yes, those people come up from the development team, they're still beholden to the wants of an executive suite that wants to control budget and timelines, and that leads to crunch and unfinished products. And some of that is unavoidable, especially in smaller studios where money is tighter. That's definitely not the case here, but I do believe many of these devs would have preferred to push back release until they had something worth people's money, but they don't have any say, especially in a big studio like Bethesda. Thor from Pirate Software has talked about how awful a work environment Blizzard was under Activision. And one of the things that made it so awful is that there was an atmosphere of "you are replaceable, you make dogshit wages because this was your dream job, and someone else wants it if you don't." Plus, legitimately qualified creatives keep leaving big studios either on their own, or are pushed out because they're too expensive, which leads to run-of-the-mill developers getting pushed up beyond their capability, to become the new creative minds of the studio when they objectively aren't ready or able.
Have a look at Bethesda dev group photos from Morrowind/Oblivion days. Then look at dev group photos now. You'll see a glaring difference. The modern obsession with 'inclusivity' rather than passion and talent has included a whole bunch of Karens, who kill creativity with their finger-wagging neo-puritanism. It's the elephant in the room. You'll see exactly the same trend with every single franchise that has been 'safe spaced' and made boring in the past decade or so. "Put a chick in it and make her gay, and lame".
The main quest pretty much tell people that don't bother building a base, a spaceship or care about the people on the planet. Because you lose everything when go to a new system. All the things you collected is gone, the weapon you built is gone. So you really should ignore everything in the main story because its just not worth saving it.
I wonder how Starfield would have been if they just focused on the Sol system. You fly between plants manually or with fast travel, every planet has an extremely unique aesthetic or biome, and Earth is the primary civilization where you'd find all the best vendors and stuff
Starfield should've told only the story about how somehow, a singular Earth government united the planet enough to create a spacefleet, house and leave the planet. There is so many obvious story threads there for an amazing game. Factions that simply refuse to leave (and potentially can be visited later, having survived), your character having to choose to snuff them out or otherwise pacify them in order to create the "unified" message. Obviously the entire Earth's population couldn't have been transported. What about those that wanted to go, but couldn't (ala vaults in Fallout)? Would the USA//Israeli government REEAAAAALLY be all that interested in flying Muslims to space with them? etc, etc, etc. I mean even IN GAME - surely your character doesn't believe that a "few ships" of people who went missing magically created an entire civilization of their own, worshipping a space snake, that was able to go to war with the remaining surviving ships (I believe it was 3 ships that went missing, out of 10 total ships?) and actually threaten them meaningfully even post-terraforming and extended population growth after the exiting said ships. There is so much obvious room for subterfuge and "things aren't as they seem" like in Fallout but Starfield has... none. Everything is completely at face value. It's baffling. The fact they wrote a shockingly convoluted "space magic" plot for the game that takes place **AFTER** a bunch of extremely interesting events is comically frustrating. Apart form the fact that Starfield is a game no one wanted, that has no target audience, and no draw. It was never a high-tech next-gen game. It isn't a voxel-baxed creator game, it isn't Elder Scrolls, and it isn't brave enough to do anything interesting like above in a way that Cyberpunk or Deus Ex has in the past. The game was made for no one, and people unironically bought this piece of shit AND still have the gall to tell me that it's good. lmao. Keep CONSOOMING, losers.
Still, Bethesda once again showed how horribly untalented they are when it comes to story telling. Sol or 1k planets doesnt matter. They can continue writing trash apolitical stories all they want.
They could've made it akin to The Expanse universe slightly altered. Have each of the (not extremely hostile) moons and planets be colonized, have Mars be terraformed, all kinds of interesting solar politics and wars and stuff, and then some alien twist in the story
Halo Guns cooler than all the weapons in Starfield: Energy sword Fuel rod cannon Gravity hammer Needler Plasma Pistol Heatwave Boltshot SRS99C(sniper rifle)
@@DozleZabithats it. They made one good game 25 years ago and they're still trying to run the same schtick. They didnt even change the engine since then, thats how much they live in the past
@@HO1ySh33t Of course. But just in terms of the evolution of RPG gaming, I reinstalled it to get a feel for how it compared to Starfield. It really is the closest in terms of its setting and genre.
I think so. But the crew were also aware that this is Todd's pet project, so they daren't say anything bad about it, and go out of their way to justify its shortcomings.
Problem with Bethesda is this... They was good at making games years ago when not so many others was... But everyone got better and everyone learned how to make good games and how Bethesda is being left behind and not able to keep up anymore but because they built a good rep from years ago people still. Hold onto hope.
This is how Blizzard is nowadays too, it's kind of sad seeing studios like this. It's like a guy who won the football championship in high school, but that was 20 years ago and now he works at a waffle house and all he has is nostalgia.
Ur words fit perfectly even if you switch the company name to blizzard. It feels like these companies got too big and they lost what made them good in the first place.
If there were more factions in the game along with maybe repercussions for being with certain factions then it would've added so much depth to the game. I feel like the only "repercussions" you have in the story is if you side with the Fleet then people will talk bad about you subtly but nothing changes really. They made like 3 interesting towns/ planets but everything felt so segmented to me. I kind of enjoyed the story the first time but after ng+ it's so much more boring than Skyrim or FO4
I ended up doing those missions to sabotage the space pirates, I got on the ship and was being shown around and standing there as they blathered on to each other because it wasn't as if the game was going to have them say anything useful in these expository scenes, I had a thought. "I'm right here with all the leaders of the space pirates and I have enough guns and bombs to level Israel." so I started blasting and mowed down every npc in my path, except for the leaders, it turns out they are essential and can't die, so there was no choice in what you can do, you can't just kill them, you can't take them into custody, blow up the Space Pirate Headquarters and then bring an end to the entire faction right then and there, no you have to play it the Bethesda way. It's like that in EVERY. SINGLE. MISSION. You play them the scripted way and you don't get to make any choices because none of it matters. And everyone is such a whiny bitch, you join the main plot faction, can't even remember what they are called and they talk about how you have freedom to get things done, they have a space pirate and psycho snake cultist in their group but all of them get pissy if you do anything illegal.
I played a lot of starfield and the biggest problem to me is I can't find the hand crafted content, just repeated space bandit camps with no unique weapons or items and just empty space where you run around and watch your stamina metar drain until you give up and fast travel back to your ship
@MrRafagigapr and morrowind had an excellent story. It is me or is Bethesda's games get worse in quality of writing over each game? Morrowind being the best then oblivion being good. Everything after is average.
@@MrRafagigapr Money. It's really as simple as that. It took a while for money people to understand video games enough to get in to the industry after it had grown to billions. But now they have, and there is no passion or creativity involved in their decisions. They don't treat it as a creative work, they treat it as a product that is mass-produced in a factory. And Starfield exemplifies this concept. Totally bland, and missing anything that makes you feel any sort of attachment to the game, but still somewhat of a functioning product.
Exactly! From Morrowind through Skyrim, the design seemed more focused on world building which leads to immersive gameplay. StarField feels more gameified on multiple levels. Like they took the scan idea from NMS, but it doesn't fit the NASA-punk theme at all. Every world has bandits or bugs everywhere so the player has something to fight. You rarely find amazing hand-crafted vistas like you would find all over Skyrim. It feels like the scope just may have been way too much for giving it the Elder Scrolls or even Fallout treatment. They literally reached for the stars when they probably should have just started with a single well-crafted planet and then expanded from there with DLC.
They should have kept it in the "sol system" like the expanse. Made each planet or moon you can land on have good details and have I different vib about each place. I think that would've worked much better. And felt a bit more like a bethesda game.
I was thinking this as well the other day. A much tighter focus and locations that people know and are interested in visiting. 98% of Starfield locations are pointless and a waste of time.
Could you imagine The Expanse: The Game (but done in a way where it's not just some crappy film tie in). Like a proper action RPG between three major factions. The two large ones at war and the smaller one caught in the middle vying for independence. Honestly, it's like Fallout New Vegas in space. Then you have alien stuff as the mysterious x-factor. Damn. If only Starfield had been something like that.
1000 planets at first sounds far more appealing then 10 planets. 10 planets sounds like its only a few hours of Fun, while 1000 planets sounds like Hundreds of hours of fun.
The astronauts on the moon weren't dropped their though a cut scene and then left to stand around for a few hours before taking another cut scene home. They actually had shit to do the whole time. You can't compare the two like what the fuck.
I love Borderlands 2. I always play Gaige. I always give her the same skillset. I still enjoy playing it over and over. Changing your character and skillset are not gonna fix a boring ass game
This guy Gaiges! Also my favourite to play by far, and of the dozen or so times I've played Borderlands 2 I've almost always been Gaige or Axton. I've tried everyone else but it just doesn't click the same.
biggest problem for me was that I am forced to be this awesome happy hero with happy people around me and even enemies are good guys. I want to turn the world into Warhammer and be the damn emperor in it.
The key takeaway for gam devs behind games like Starfield and No Man's Sky is that sometimes bigger maps arent better. A well developed playing area is key to a good gaming experience.
I really hope gaming as a whole starts moving away from open world. If you don't have anything worth putting in that big space, don't fucking have the space at all. I'd rather have a good, focused linear narrative than vast fields of nothing with the occasional crafting supply to dot the landscape.
Open world like Skyrim? Yes. Open world limited to a few hundert meters per cell with a lucky singular POI out of 5 available which don't even provide small differences, no story and no reason to be there? No. It's 2023. Two people working on a low budget game solve this better than Bethesda did.
tbf modern NMS doesnt market itself like starfield did. NMS knows its empty but its map is absolutely gigantic so its still fun just going to star-systems to see what cool planets there are. Starfield not only doesnt have a map big enough to justify the lack of content but all the planets suck and don't have the same effect that seeing a 10 meter big dinosaur bird fly around a radioactive mountain does in NMS.
Deus Ex handled it with the opposite approach: take a city block or two, and stuff it with life. Small map, but there's so much to do you tend to overlook or ignore it
Never go by others. You'll end up missing a ton of good games simply because some streamer made it popular to whine about a given game. If you don't want to buy the game blind, then get a month of gamepass to try it out first for minimum cost. Or wait till people do lets plays and watch an episode (never watch the first episode if you want to minimize spoilers for yourself) What others think means next to nothing. What you think matters. Never ever base what you think on others opinions of something.
@@LabelsAreMeaningless Buy? Nah I was gonna pirate it, but I felt it wasn't even worth pirating. The stuff that people didn't like was things that I wouldn't have liked either. For example I didn't play Cyberpunk on release because others said it was a buggy mess, and I agreed, so I waited a year until they fixed the bugs and then I had a great time with it.
Me: I'm bored. Bethesda: No you're not. Me: Yes. I'm bored. Bethesda: No. You're not bored. Me: Pretty sure I'm bored. Bethesda: You think you are, but you're not. Me: Not this again.
What both Yong and Asmon are not pointing out here is WHY Bethesda is responding to reviews. The response system gives Bethesda the last word on the review, and they hope that recency bias will make readers see the review as less negative. They don't care about the opinion of the reviewer.
No amount of perceived effort put into responding to negative reviews would change the score, especially if anyone actually reads the responses in detail.
That works until you remember "we aren't planning on doing anything about it" is a thing they said in response to another controversy about a certain bag. Anyone that cared left long ago.
if that's the reason then that is woefully wrong any sort of recency bias would be dwarfed by the novelty of the developer getting into the weeds with these online arguments
I can't comment on what their motivations are but this isn't a good look for them, regardless. Nobody who actually looks at the reviews is going to overlook how tone-deaf this is.
I think the issue is the game philosophy as a whole. The game was made with modders in mind and while a sandbox is a great idea, it’s almost like the game was reliant on mods in general. Skyrim of course would eventually be modded but the game is still fundamentally a good game with good story, a timeless landscape, and amazing atmosphere that just draws you to get lost in. I NEVER felt that way with Starfield. It’s as if Bethesda was banking on the idea that the game would be “finished” with mods. I still regularly play Skyrim often but sad to say I haven’t touched Starfield since it’s second week. I thought one mission was alright but there’s genuinely nothing that’s keeping me motivated to return to the game in any way
I loved skyrim because I could run around and cause problems blowing up NPCs with fireballs, hoarding cheese wheels, watching goofy ass npc ragdoll physics, and generally just head out and do my own thing for hours on end and slowly complete the quests. The bar for experimentation was pretty low and you could do a lot in the open world that had NO LOADING SCREENS. It wasn't complicated, it wasn't difficult, but it was still fun to play around in.
I love how the responses from the Devs all sound like investor meeting talking points... Explanations by people who don't play games to people who also don't play video games...
The developer responses are like those responses you see from the brand on Amazon products. But instead of the brand apologizing and trying to solve your issue, it's the engineer of the product replying to tell you that you just don't understand how great their can opener is, even if the wheel doesn't turn, you get extra play time from poking each hole individually and it also has a fold out corkscrew on the handle.
For all the flaws Fallout 4 had, and it had many, often glaring ones. I still had a lot of fun playing it. I'd often just be roaming the world and seeing what crazy nonsense would happen. Things like traveling through a section of Boston I knew were hotspots for events. And often times just walking into 2-3 factions spawning events at the same time, resulting in a huge firefight. I've never really experienced any emergent gameplay like that from Starfield. It's always the same 4 scripted pirate events I've seen 20 other times.
This are also very common on googleplay store, developers often respond to the negative comments on their shitty p2w mobile game. They will comment saying such as "I'm sorry that our product didn't meet your expectation. We will continue to improve and do better." It's a strategy to downplay the negative comments and to show they acknowledge the problem and fix them. No they don't care about the negative comments, it's just all smokes. In Bestheda case, it's worse. They aren't there smokes the new players, they literally saying "you are wrong, we are not fixing the game and here is how you should play it". They made unhappy players having less hope for their next title. Also Driving away new players with their attitude.
I’ve never had second hand embarrassment this badly for a dev studio. At least blizzard had the wherewithal to drop to their knees and apologize, even if it was just to save face.
Sadly, I have ONE SINGLE good thing to say about Starfield and it’s subjective… : I really really loved the color grading and general ambiance and tech design they went for. A bit too repetitive at times, but that kind of high fine tech, spacecore, sometimes somewhat retrofuture design was exactly what I was waiting for. And the noisy washed out image seemed like a old sci-fi space movie and I loved it. Along with some of the musics, I sometimes really enjoyed some feelings it gave me. « NASA punk » as they said, I loved that. But that’s purely subjective. But that’s literally all… that’s important, but as everything else is falling apart, it’s not enough at all. I agree, loading screens didn’t kill the game at all. No weapon crafting (only accessories, not even that interesting for most of them), annoying skill tree progression, boring exploration, boring combat most of the time, annoying xp progression, boring af main story, not enough different dugeons at all. Man for dungeons it’s literally playing the same 5-6 same dungeons again and again… when you see how many there was in Skyrim that’s depressing. They somewhat made it more boring than No Mans Sky which has less dungeons… I don’t know how they did that, that’s actually pretty impressive lol.
One of the biggest issues I have with exploring planets is that there is only ever ONE or TWO interesting areas to explore but they are like almost a kilometer away from point A to B and you cant fly your ship to even get there. You are forced to just go by foot and Bethesda stated they will never add land vehicles cause you already have one which is your ship and that is so dumb to me.
@@Lufanosno it's just out of touch devs. They clearly did a fuck ton of work and it just isn't good. There isn't some big conspiracy other than half truths by marketing
So, instead of them taking accountability that their game sucks, we can expect the same level and care and quality going forward with their future projects? Nice, now I can basically totally give up on them as devs.
It's simply a trend that people are jumping on. Most of the noise comes from people copying whatever their chosen streamer said. Just watch. Whenever a streamer decides to dump on any game with a hot take, everyone piles on. Most have never even played.
@@jaydub2546 he's not wrong though. The game is bad yeah but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Most people didn't play the game because it was bad and people trashed on it which became a trend. Which is normal.
Yeah I spent a good 100 hours and the new game Plus and felt robbed of currency and guns taken away I kept playing, and was at the point where I wanted to play straight evil and couldn't do that at certain times, then yes I was bored after that.
The world-building in Starfield is so haphazard and bizarre. I saw a funny twitter thread of people just throwing out all these random elements of civilization and culture that they just hadn’t thought to include.
@@acourierofourhopesandaamer8303I posted something like this on a Reddit the other day….New Atlantis is meant to be the peak of human technology and civilisation but it’s just buildings surrounded by wilderness. Like did we not bother to populate this planet!? 😂
I am entertained by Starfield, Todd trying to laugh the tears of tragic rage out of himself, while every other nominee whisks away awards during the events this week.
for real tho, the awards given out to the nominees were sensible and fair. not surprised Starfield didnt make the cut anywhere, and i hate to admit that, but it is what it is
@@Aranak777 considering the clear cut line up this year, there would have alot of questions that would have to be answered. The community religated starfield to a strong MID and i havent heard anyone say otherwise in a reasonable way
I was thinking about playing a bit today, I still have it installed with about 15 mods, and I was looking over Nexus for ship mods and thought about downloading one for cool looking custom ship habs, sounds cool right? make your own luxury yacht in the game, decorate it with the house/outpost tools.... well, except, I mean, think about it: why do you need a ship? literally, in a space game, WHY does it even have space ships? and that may seem like a stupid question, I mean, its a space game, right? except no. the ship is a fast travel beacon and thats it. you board your ship, go right to the bridge, sit down, warp to your location, and, hell, if its a spot on a planet youve been to, like the New Atlantis shipyard, you just appear outside your already landed ship. think about it, you'll NEVER sleep in the captains quarters, you'll NEVER use your ships work benches, you literally cant interact with the items in the ship anyway, the monitors are purely decorative, you cant turn the fans on or off, you cant lift weights.... no, you board your ship, hit fast travel, and thats it. mods cant fix that. this game CANT EVEN be saved by the mods because all a mod can do is enhance whats in the game, its fundamentally broken and feature absent to the point where new or different after market content cant help it. I mean, take the ship example and expand it to EVERY aspect of the game; you cant enhance a procedurally generated generic moon, you cant enhance a useless outpost system and make outposts somehow relevant. no, they did the impossible, make a game so hollow and shit WE cant even help it. its utterly DOA
I logged 120 hours on Starfield in the first two weeks. I’ve never even completed the main story. I got totally lost in the vehicle ship building trying to build the coolest and strongest ship possible. Most of my time was spent in the builder or the menus trying to get to places. I finally built this awesome ship and spent 4 hours trying to find a ship fight. And then it was just over in 10 seconds. And then I asked myself… am I having fun? No… and I uninstalled the game and haven’t touched it since launch.
The fact that I was more engaged with the drums playing in the background, than I was watching the final boss of one of the most anticipated games of the year, is fucking hilarious.
It misses the biggest Bethesda hook that make their games fun. You might get a quest that is just to kill a boss in a cave. But you can spend 2 hours getting to the quest location because there is so much interesting stuff to find on the way. Starfield gets rid of that, destroying the whole Bethesda formula that gets you hooked. I feel they do not understand anymore what made their games fun.
@@thedonzhorzh That's unfortunate. I played through NG+ 1 and then a little bit after that. I wanted to make sure I consumed the story. And I had a good time doing that. I agree there is a whole bunch of "empty" but you can easily not let that ruin your play experience. Plenty of other stuff to do for longer than 3 hours.
@@genereynoldsactual It's just boring to me. 1000 planets and all you do when you land on any of them is scan for pois and walk in straight line for 5 minutes with nothing to distract you. Don't care about the story in a Bethesda game. Exploration is almost non existent compared to The Elder Scrolls or Fallout. Also, the game just feels like it came out 12 years ago. Nothing next gen about loading screens every 5 minutes. I have seen a lot of videos with high level characters and nope, it doesn't seem to get that much better.
I think you're right, they just don't understand their own thing anymore. Half the fun in Bethesda games used to be just walking in a direction and finding stuff.
The biggest concern in this situation is the realization that Bethesda just won't listen to fans and fix their games. Yeah, NMS was not great at launch, Cyberpunk 2077 wasn't great at launch. But you know why they're good today? Because the devs listened. NMS devs went silent for a long time and kept working on updates to make the game better. CD Projekt Red said, "We're sorry players don't like Cyberpunk", and then went silent and came back with the 2.0 and completely remade the game essentially. They didn't try to play mind-tricks with the fanbase trying to justify the game's shortcomings. They didn't say "oh the lack of vehicle combat is by design because it's realistic", "oh there is a lot of tech needed to render each and every NPC AI properly". They just acknowledged the bad release, and went to working on it to fix it. Bethesda just doesn't wanna listen to criticism. All these years of putting Todd on a pedestal has ensured that they're convinced they can do no wrong. Which is why now, when they HAVE done something wrong, they just try to play mind-games and loops to somehow convince the player that the problem is the player not the game. What a damn mess.
Cyberpunk was bugged as hell for too many people at launch, but the game didn’t change much before the DLC update. And even, aside from the skill tree not a lot has completely changed. But NMS is a good example yeah. CP too but not as much.
Honestly the funnest times I've had with Bethesda games have been when I tried to do Skyrim without fast travel, without any of the exploits for leveling on Legendary difficulty (honestly, which they had a mode more like survival mode where enemies weren't just hit sponges), and Fallout 4 survival. The main reason is that both would force me to actually learn what was where, think about paths because I new that X enemy was blocking my way, stuff like that. Starfeild just... I don't think I could ever sink the same amount of time that I've put into other Bethesda games
Exactly, fast travel quickly kills most of the fun in their games. Exploration and wandering around between destinations and discovering random stuff is what made it immersive. Especially with mods like Immersive world Encounters with tons of new quests and npcs fully voice acted. Starfield on the other hand is built on constantly fast-traveling (their outdated engine demands it), and any exploration involves landing on rng planets where you just get a mix of POIs pulled from a small handful of identical locations. "And there's going to be a pistol in that locker over there... yep." I was pretty much done when I read the same data pads from the same people, on completely different planets lol, like wtf? At that point I was like "Yeah, fuck this". Outside of the quests themselves, it's just one big uninspired mess.
I think you've nailed it here, I played hours of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim just walking around without a specific plan, the same again with the Fallout games. You have absolutely no incentive to do that in Starfield, I started playing thinking I'd be exploring space Bethesda style but it wasn't anything like those games.
Remember that early reviews were giving it 10/10 and people got their pitchforks out when the first 7/10 came out. Either they were scared of the playerbase or just took Bethesda marketing speak / potential as promises for later in the game. All the issues can be identified within the first couple hours or playing but people kept hyping each other up under the guise of 'the next Skyrim'
People jumped between the main faction missions, which provide a good 30 - 40 hours of content. Barely any location-dependent side quests encourage exploration because it's all tied into the main faction content. The game gives directions, and random stuff on planets that are hand-crafted or meaningful is rare. You can look up "Side Quests," but nearly all of them are actually in the major faction cities or a few major planets that are part of the significant faction storylines, meaning all the other worlds are vacant; there is no point in "exploring" outside of the cities. It would be best to explore all the towns the faction and main quests bring you to, but doing that alone can get you all the quests in the game.
I played nearly a hundred hours waiting for it to get better, all it did was convince me that previous games were flukes made fun by mods. Starfield doesn't even have the mods to make it fun and might never have them.
The thumbnail got me. I can't believe that was actually a real response from a supposedly professional "customer service" rep at Bethesda. That's like a response you'd get from someone who calls you from a scam center and then you call them out on the scam.
Its not just Bethesda that does this. Nearly every studio/company in the entertainment industry punches down on their audience, especially when a segment of the audience does go along with their narrative.
Love the fact his neighbours play the drums once a month for 30 minutes and then stop, that has to be some kind of ritual.. Trying to summon the hermit out of his house.
In Skyrim 2011 there were loading screens, to enter cities, houses, etc., and you know? Someone released a mod, open cities, that eliminated them, the mod was not perfect but then some more came out. Twelve years later Starfield comes out with the same or more loading screens...
From a game developer standpoint it is significantly better to have many loading screens that take 7 seconds than have a huge, fully open world that loads for 7 minutes when you start the game
@@kevinmalisek9353but… there are huge open worlds with no load screens whatsoever that load up in 7 seconds… it is literally just Bethesda that can’t implement this
@@kevinmalisek9353 Those aren't the only two options. Most modern open world games don't have nearly as many loading screens, nor do they take 7 mins to load.
Starfield is the only game in my 40 years of gaming that I ACTUALLY hate. I will not be purchasing The Elder Scrolls VI because of it, or any other game released by Bethesda or has Todd associated with it, like Indiana Jones...
Pretty strange to hear YongYea point out the negative response of Bugthesda while doing that exact Diva thing when players recently called out his poor voice acting & portrayal of Kiryu.
42:15 I loved Skyrim primarily for its setting, the evocative and beautiful landscapes and architecture and the music, and I also found the skill and talent trees captivating (for a time). I didn't find the combat, dialogue, story or voice acting great, but it was okay enough. As an RPG main I'm used to a little bit of clunk in favor of RPG mechanics. What kept me in the game a lot longer than it by itself would have been able to was the modding scene, though. But what killed all of my investment was when they brought out the Legendary Edition (or whatever it was called), which invalidated a majority of mods. I never made the effort of updating or replacing the 100+ mods that were no longer functional, it sucked. But yeah, to this day I feel a deep connection with Skyrim through its music and landscape pictures / recordings, I think that is the main thing. I also think back to some memories of interesting locations and points of interest I discovered as I roamed around the lovingly crafted world. The feeling of exploration was another great achievement of the game.
Skyrim was already a worse game than Oblivion, which was worse than Morrowind. I am quite old and have always been into RPG's since pixel vomit games of the early 90's, and I didn't even bother to get Starfield, it was obvious how shite it was gonna be, you watch the curve and you predict.
@@niccolobrioschi3758 I'm not necessarily talking about intricate details of individual buildings, but more on a larger scale. Google Skyrim Solitude or Markarth for example. When I mentioned architecture in my comment I was primarily thinking of buildings and towns like these with (at least conceptually) interesting layouts and designs, and also the way they fit into the landscape and are evoking a sense of awe and scale.
@@holysecret2 fair enough. Starfield is not bad however, at least relatively... Bethesda has always made problematic games if you think about it. I loved Oblivion but it had a completely broken leveling system that made leveling up optional AND counterproductive f.e. and many preferred to complete the game at level 1. I think very young people don't know or remember
Coming from Oblivion, Skyrim, ESO and Fallout 4, Bethesda seem to really struggle when it comes to making a compelling main or overarching storyline. Which I find very strange, because I tend to find their side quests very enjoyable. This problem tends to only become worse when Bethesda forces players to go through the main storyline due to content or game features being locked behind it.
Yeah, I always thought the best questlines in Skyrim were not the main quest. The College of Winterhold, Thieves Guild, Dark Brotherhood, and the Companions really stole the show.
Morrowind story was great, tho the original lore guy left afterwards which is also why we got basic ass medieval Europe cyrodil and Viking Skyrim instead of what they really were in the original lore
The engine alone is certainly enough to make it bad because I didn't even make it 2 hours in, so I didn't even get a chance to get turned off by the story. Literally in the opening scene they have people in a mine lasering the walls but there are no damage effects to the wall whatsoever. And I don't mean they didn't have destructible walls, there's no bump mapping or even textures to show the mining lasers do anything. Goldeneye for the N64 had better wall damage effects. Then you have the same janky AI we've been seeing for 22 years now, and loading screens, physics, inventory management. It's unacceptable. I didn't even like Skyrim that much because I was such a huge Oblivion fan I'd already seen it all before, just like Morrowind fans didn't think Oblivion was that impressive. It's the same Bethesda BS that's been going on forever, but it just isn't acceptable in 2023, not with the other games it has to compete with. Even if Star citizen is a bit janky, the stuff they have done with it is absolutely insane, literally flying from any part on one planet to any part of another, server meshing, and gameplay physics being the same throughout every aspect of the game. You can also leave a hotdog on one planet and a day later another player can fly down to the same spot you left it and eat it. And for FPS and action it is a sh!tstain on the boot of Cyberpunk's gameplay. For people calling it mid I don't know what crappy games you are playing that are worse. I haven't played a game as bad as Starfield in years.
I've played with modded infinite carry weight and the reason why it is so restricted is, that the game literally freezes when you switch weapons if you have more than 1000 kg of loot.
I think what hurt this game the most is the fact that Baldur's Gate 3 and Elden Ring exist. They reminded people good games can exist These two have so greatly elevated the standards of what roleplaying and open-world games could be. It doesn't help that Starfield came out so close to BG3, meaning it was still really fresh in the collective minds of the internet.
No Mans Sky especially. I played that game and it has way more exploration than Starfield and that's what I was looking for. The combat is not amazing but I like flying around, gathering resources and exploring wherever I wanna go and that's what that game has
Fallout New Vegas already did that. It's just that Bethesda gained an incredible number of casual fanboys thanks to the hype of Skyrim and Fallout 4 that does not know what a good non-linear, well-written RPG looks like. BG3 came out and brought it to the next level and reminded people of what a RPG should be like.
I disagree that load screens aren't important. They are the core game mechanic that breaks all immersiveness, and obviously it can't be fixed by mods. I don't say that without the issue the game would be a good, because it's not, but it's really one of the biggest problems. Second one is the absence of space in a space game, you just not feel that you're flying, you're just jumping with load screens from one scene to another. Personally I would disabled fast travel at all with condition that those two problems were non existed. This would not fix the game entirely but it would have at least some perspective that someday will be released some great mods that fixes other problems. Because without that the game is dead, I really don't believe that it can be fixed with any patches or mods.
They’re either going to hail it as the biggest turnaround since no man’s sky, or it’ll be dissected forever on how not to make a video game. There’s SO MUCH SHIT in this game. And I mean shit, annoying fluff, like 100 different drugs that I barely know what they do, a bazillion things for building outposts which is fucking annoying to clutter shit up, and a dumbass decision to restrict the loot you can store and WHY ARE VENDORS SO FUCKING POOR
@@aquagrunty101 not to pat myself on the back, but I saw it all a mile away. Plenty of my friends and coworkers were fuckin soyjack pogging about every little detail that was revealed and my cynical ass was suspicious the whole time. Turned out I was right. But I'm only like that because I've been burned a couple of times by the hype train already. The only way I ever want to experience this game is through the inevitable five hour long Joseph Anderson video.
The cake analogy is great, but you don't even need to throw in strange ingredients. Bethesda had all the same tools as anyone else, they screwed up their measurements, they used a recipe that never worked well and relied on those about to eat it to slather enough frosting to fix the taste, and this time they also burnt it. When you have a burnt cake, you can't fix it with frosting(mods). You throw it out and start over from scratch.
I thought it was so cool to see a ronin class with the possibility (I thought) to be a space Ninja. There is like only one samurai sword in the entire game and stealth (in my opinion) is garbage. I constantly failed to stay undetected even without companions. This just made me not want to play another class because they couldn't get this one right. But who knows. Maybe I misunderstood the ronin class or had too high of hopes?
Todd knows, and he says you played his game wrong and need to put in another 100 hours with a new character to make the game feel completely different, that's when it gets good trust me. You may have had high hopes and flown too close to the sun, but Bethesda was the one who told you how high to fly, and they designed the wings.
Funny. There are actually two swords. And a few other melee weapons in the game. And you might be doing it wrong as I play a stealth melee build with a lot of success. Now, if Bethesda were to implement things that people here complain about, that build and quite a lot of related skills would become pointless. Do we really want that in BGS games?
Users: "The game is boring"
Devs: "Have you tried playing it more?!"
Hahaha. Yep, that’s the message I got too. Starfraud is garbage.
Starfailed
but they are right though. people just hate to jump on the hate bandwagon the game is pretty decent. but people just have such high expectations and no own opinions that they just hate for no reason
It's always been this.
There was a group of people who genuinely hated Skyrim and thought it was trash. What were we told? "Keep playing it gets better." "You're playing it wrong."
The one key difference between Skyrim's core gameplay loops and Starfield's is that Skyrim at least got world-crafting and exploration right, Starfield didn't. And that's also the straw that broke the camel's back because world-crafting and exploration are *precisely* what sustained Skyrim and FO4 in the public's eyes despite people growing more accepting of how flawed the games are over the years.
Those core gameplay systems though...? They were stale 13 years ago and they're stale now. It's only getting worse. The "you need at least 800 hours before the game gets going" crowd is just the most denialist fanboys of the community who desperately want an out to shield the game from criticism with.
@@savagememes873 for no reason? Aww no.. please don’t get me started!! How many reasons would you like? I’ve easily got to 30 good reasons why Starfield is awful. I’m not a hater, either. I love Oblivion, Skyrim and Fallout 4, I’m BGS’s dream fan come to life … if they re-released Skyrim tomorrow for £70 I’d buy it without thinking twice because I love the game. I don’t love Starfield because it’s a rotten, flawed game.
Being a Bethesda fanboy and playing Starfield is like having an alcoholic deadbeat dad show up for Christmas one year to gift you a 6 pack of tube socks from Walmart then pass out on the couch
Thats v specific.
Just remember we're here for you.
This is me, except I don't have kids. So I just wander into someone's house full of Christmas cheer, and tube socks
It’s more like having a GREAT father who leaves when you’re older than 10 who ends up leaving for years and then does the tubesock gift
I’m a Bethesda fan boy but idk man… them games ain’t got the same spark as fallout4 and new Vegas anymore… :( I was hyped for starfield but the worlds seem empty ass hell
@@gorillapimpbeats News flash, New Vegas wasn't even made by Bethesda... it was crafted for them by Obsidian (a far better dev, in my opinion).
Bethesda lost all credibility with me when they said they couldn't increase the stash size in FO76 because of technical limitations, and then we discovered the technical limitation is "you have to pay a monthly subscription fee."
bethesda had little credibility to begin with, with me. Didn't play its games but had a laugh at its bugs compilations on youtube. TBH I laughed at Gothic bugs, but somehow its part of the game and I like it :)
With me it was the writing/story in fallout 4. Bethesda straight up told their main writer to not put effort into it because players "won't care anyways". They've completely lost the plot.
If that’s what FO76 players are dealing with, then that game is worse than I thought.
@@JerkandDork And they were correct. Many players don't care about the main quest. YT is full of evidence to support it.
So them completely botching the release didn’t do it for you? Lol
Player with 100 hours: "The game is boring"
Dev: "No its not"
players with 700+ hours: "The game keeps to surprise me" 🤷♂
But in a game that alleges scale, does spending a significant amount of time in it not provide you with the perspective that something isn't really that good? If someone played for 10 hours and said it's trash it will be less valuable than someone who spent 60 hours to really get to know the game and tell me it's bad.
@@OccamAsylum Yes, that was my point exactly. Players with 100+ hours should be able to tell you if something is fun or not.
-It smells funny in there.
-No, it doesn't.
@@BribedSeeker904 nobody has ever said that
Me: Hey, this food tastes terrible...
Bethesda: Try eating it out of a different bowl! Use a plastic spoon instead, you'll feel like you're eating an entirely different meal!
Lol, it's dogshit though, they'll say put whipped cream on it.
When children in Africa ate this food they certainly didn’t think it tasted terrible
Turn the plate half a rotation and it's like a whole new meal!
@@wiredshadowfury569I didn't realize that starving African children were Xbox fanboys.
Meanwhile the plastic spoon is toxic and bad for our health, just like this game are.
You know a game has failed when the developer responses are, “This is how you are supposed to play.”
"And how you're supposed to feel about it!" 😂
Thanks for telling me how to play a RPG.. lmao yeah Bethesda kinda lost there place after fallout 4
The true failed game is wokeverine coming in 2026
@@a.ILLAGER.SpeaksI didn't know starfield has salt mines to. Don't work yourself to death you won't be doing it yourself
@@a.ILLAGER.Speaks Bad bait
- NPC schedules and homes GONE
- Trespassing mechanic GONE
- NPC reactions to aggression or player collision GONE
- Investing in merchants GONE
- Pickpocketing unique/useful items GONE
- Swimming and underwater environments GONE
- Viable melee combat GONE
- Stealth executions GONE
- Visible damage on robots GONE
- Location damage (shooting legs to cripple etc) GONE
- Dismemberment GONE
- Healing/stimpak animation GONE
- Boss enemies GONE
- Basic enemy variety/behaviours GONE
They threw out _all_ the babies and just kept the bathwater.
@@theguylivinginyourwalls
If it's Belle Delphine bath water...
crippling and a few other mechanics came back as a skill, but i get the point, its a pretty bad downgrade allb the way
@@spikertaker Yes. It smells of cheap perfume and fanny cheese.
Damn. When you list it like this... Wild. How far they've fallen. Fallout3 was legitimately one of my favorite games of all time.
Remember how in Spore, players could create creatures and share them? They should make a space game where players can make their own planets, and then submit them for other users to review and share- and the game should populate users galaxies with the top user rated ones
I would totally play a game like that
i love this idea
The game you are looking for is called Space Engineers. Craft-able planets, ships, bases, outposts. Actual ships you build yourself and fly, from the planets surface into space, with orbital physics etc. Not a single loading screen.
There are already games like that that exist. Including an MMO that I forgot the name of.
Spore unironically has better space exploration than Starfield
Bethesda successfully gaslighted people into thinking that you have to play 10 hours, 100 hours, 200 hours in bad game before you can say the game is bad.
If I can’t tell if it’s good or not in the first 2 hours (refund period lol), it’s probably not a very good game.
I refused to accept this for anime and I refuse it for games. Time is precious, there's too many things that are good in the first 10 hours.
It happens, on occasion. FF14 was for me a good example of "gets good after ~50 hours", but that's a lot of hours and the only reason I went through it was because I trusted my friends. It had free trial at least, so I could suffer though the slog that's early game for free and only pay for it when I decided that I do enjoy the game.
It shouldn't be that way though. Again, 50h is a long time. Hells, even 10h is a long time. A lot of good games can be finished in 10 hours, do I have to play them ten times to decide that they were good? If you need 10+ hours to say if a game is bad then I want to be able to have my money back after 10 hours of playing if it's turns out to be bad. If you need 200h to tell how good or bad the game is, then I don't want to pay for those 200h, thank you very much. If you are lucky, you may have ~400,000 hours to live (not including sleep), out of which half will be school and work (again, if you are lucky). They want you to spend hundreds of hours deciding if a game is good but you have to pay for it in advance, lol.
If you don’t play it enough, you’re not allowed to say it’s bad. If you play it past a certain point, you can’t say it’s bad because you MUST have enjoyed it to play long enough. It’s like a paradox you’re just never allowed to say it’s bad
If a game is well designed it will hook you in the first few minutes. If you made a game thats boring for an entire hour, that's pathetic and no one should be playing it
I knew this was going to happen when Bethesda claimed there would be "1000 planets" huge red flag, alot of people dont understand how hard it would be to handcraft 1000 planets. I've been saying from the very beginning I'd rather have 3 or 4 detailed planets than 1000 boring ones
I'm not a game designer and I figured as much myself
That’s a huge problem with games now, it’s all quantity over quality
problem is not 1000 planets.. problem is you cannot land on none
3 or 4 inst enough and 1000 with nothing on them is a scam...
Somehow Spore managed to make their space stage with decent replayability 15 years ago. You can have 1000 planets, just make the available minigames sandboxey enough for players to enjoy long enough before they notice it's a chore.
Starfield is the proof that we need to change our "biggest map" definition now from "theoretical size" to "walkable space that doesn't include empty space"
Good point. "Here's my new game that's 10,000 times larger than Starfield, but it's just two rooms that you teleport between.....but they're really far away from each other, trust me."
@@sydhamelin1265 We all should have seen this coming after Skyrim, which is well known for being as wide as an ocean and as deep as a puddle. They just took that even further. Make it as wide as the universe, and as deep as...
Esecially when games like No Mans Sky or Eve Online exist that ACTUALLY have millions of planets and an entire universe to explore.
@@TheOnlyGhxst And that's the crux of the problem. If you're playing Starfield for sci-fi RPG, games like Mass Effect, and even Outer Worlds, are leagues ahead.
For open world space exploration? No Man's Sky, Elite Dangerous, Eve Online, leagues ahead.
Starfield doesn't excel at anything, and it feels a decade behind the times.
So tired of locked/ empty buildings in open world/ survival games. Huge map, but only half or less is actually accessible. Cyberpunk is this huge vertical city, but you really only explore horizontally with a few exceptions. I'm an explorer... nowhere to go in starfield.
the "first boss fight" can also be killed with a single grenade
what a great "boss"
Funny thing is that even in Skyrim the enemy humanoids have more variety on them.
The afflicted can just puke acid on you instead of just swinging a blade, the falmer have insects to annoy you and the forsworn have exposed hearts that you can steal and outright insta kill them.
Even as limited by its engine as Skyrim was, it still managed to be brilliantly unique and varied.
Yeah, Skyrim made the hype for Starfield bigger, so they did not need to make a real game in order to sell insane amount of copies, before players realized it was a scam.
Not to mention skyrim actually makes you feel like you a part of a large and thribing world, complete with an afterlife and strange eldritch dimensions. AND skyrim is just a part Nirn which is much, much bigger and any older fan of the elder scrolls know this. When you simply compare the scale of skyrim landscape vs empty sphere number 5 that we call planet, the winner is obvious.
That was pre-ESG and DEI...you can't champion those things and expect anything good to come from a company, bc they aren't hiring the best, they are checking boxes, in both the imagined world, and the real world...
Yeah if this game would have included alien races with tons of lore, this game would have been way more interesting imo
"even in Skyrim the enemy humanoids have more variety on them" ... now they do.
just wait like 5 - 8 years and Starfield hopefully has, too.
Love how it pads the gameplay loop by always landing you 500 yards from POIs and making you WALK. Like your character made a conscious decision to waste time after mandatory fast travel loading screens.
i havent played starfield or heard much about it, can u really not just fly your ship accross the planet and land wherever?
@@SonGoku5363you can't even fly your ship.
Imagine the COD tank missions. Then imagine the connection those had to the infantry missions, and you've already got a better connected world than Starfield.
yikes , i just started looking it up after i made that comment. I was expecting it to be no mans sky type of flying/exploration but its just docking at a station > loading screens lol i absolutely HATE that about space games. That shit was okay in 2008 but now its just embarrassing @@ICCUWANSIUT
This!! I literally felt like they were trying to waste my time, and it was infuriating.. I don't wanna "land" at the location and still be FORCED to run!
Not sure why it lands you FAR away from where you want to go SOMETIMES. Most time, this is HARDLY the case but in the most rural side quests like looking for a cave or rural outpost or something. But it's actually typical, landscapes like that are DIFFICULT to land a 700 meter ship at- you may need to touch down 1/2 a mile from where your heading. Missions in cities or more developed places tend to have landing pads or places you can land closer nearby.
I hope they put landing vessels/ shuttle craft in that can put you a few meters from your destination instead, in the future.
Honestly I love Bethesda devs just going off the deep end and responding to Steam reviews. It's hilarious 😂
Love your content Big Dan
Love your content
I can't help but to feel this is sort of like having to explain your Halloween costume. Like at this point I don't really care how good it is after you explain it, if you couldn't make it clear from the start and communicate it to the player effectively, you still failed, dumdums.
At this point I wouldn't even be surprised when the responds are generated from an AI
I've also received a comment but I'm fairly sure it's written by AI, not an actual person. It didn't understand the comment thoroughly and offered non-solutions to my critic.
*"The game isn't bad. You are."* -words NO gaming company should ever say to a player, even a dissatisfied one. Fans can say it, but the developers and anyone who worked on it should let the game speak for them.
Starfield is exactly the game we expected if we’re being truly honest with ourselves. The moment they said 1000 planets.
well, No Many Sky has milions planets and still they are way more imersive and fun that this piece of sh.
I literally Lol'd hard when I read that. I genuinely said "yeah, right". Then wrote it off nearly entirely 😂
The moment I saw first gameplay trailer and after literally 15 seconds when I saw pixelated 2d sprites of smokes from spaceship engines I knew that there's little if no hope.
And yeah, Todd Howard basically didn't lied to us. What he showed is what we got.
All of this just works.
And spider mid 2 earn every single award it got at the game awards which is zero…just starfield 😮
The general problem with Starfield is the things NPCs asked you to do would only make sense in a medieval setting. Those "talk to [person]" quests where you travel to another planet, talk to [person], and travel back to the 1st planet, would only make sense in a future where phones somehow don't exist.
For me it was the crowd thing. Did you see the AngryJoeShow review of the game? You know the saying of how once you see certain things, you can't UNsee them? My thing was the crowds in Starfield. In CP 2077 I shoot a gun in the street (not necessarily AT anyone), & the crowd around me runs away in fear & maybe the cops show up. I do the same thing in Starfield & nothing happens. Folks are saying the loading screens take them out of the games immersion, for me it's the crowds non-reaction to things you do.
How would a phone call connect to another planet reliably? I think this would a thing that would actually be required if we lived across multiple galaxies, especially if you didn't want the call to be intercepted.
@@StoganNZYou realize the signals that we use for cell phones on Earth now would still work in space we would just need to set up fucking relays to send the messages. Yes there would be a delay between messages so you wouldn't be able to have an actual like phone call. But there is absolutely no reason you would have to send a person across the Galaxy to talk to someone and then send them back to yourself. That makes absolutely no sense. Also every mode of communication that we have is easily interceptible. So you talking about being worried about privacy is ridiculous considering the fact that we don't have any already.
@@StoganNZIn the future it would be highly possible seeing as you have comms lol
@StoganNZ It's a damn sci-fi fantasy set way in the future. They could explain it and make it work easy
Todd Howard is the master of overselling and under delivering. He's made it an art.
Fntastic surely took him as inspiration
the bob ross of scams
Imagine how his wife feels
@@traincore1955He has a wife?
Gaymers are easy to convince
On his point of the engine, Laurian has used a contract of the same creation engine from Oblivion for BG3 they worked on since DivinityOS1. The difference is they have IMPROVED the engine on their end! You can see the effort in their cinematics, textures and models. My god the character model difference between BG3 and Starfield is night and day and they are based on the same engine!
Its really the difference between an up and coming studio passionate about its work and respectful to its customers, and a well established studio coasting off its past reputation and seeking to cash in on unweary customers.
@@monkeytime9851exactly. Laurian will become the same if they survive that long, could be in a few years or 10 but it'll happen
The best Bethesda games were made by Obsidian….
Larian uses their own inhouse engine for their games, divinity engine, at the very least for the last 10 years or so.
Source: RL friend worked there the last 10 years.
I like how Todd had to sit through 3,5hrs of the Game Awards and wasn't given a single one for this piece of shit, that's literally worse than everything Bethesda has ever made.
Must have been even worse for the creators of Spiderman 2
@@Alucard171 Armored Core chads, we can't stop winning.
a game available for one console, thats mostly rehashing everything from the first game with slightly better graphics isn't really mindblowing frl @@Alucard171
@@Alucard171how come? They didn’t win anything and it wasn’t a life changing game but at least that game is pretty well received and it has a 92% on metacritic from players starfield is a 60% game and everyone shits on it lol
@@Ar17778AC6 genuinely deserves it. Fromsoft never ceases to disappoint. The Japanese way of creating games is soooo much different than the American way.
1:24 It is still CRAZY to me how hard game reviewers/journalists/podcasters were trying to avoid saying negative things about Starfield before it was "safe" to do so. Go back and look at the initial wave of post-launch coverage. Listen to them desperately talk wide circles around the game's shortcomings and put a nervous spin on all of its flaws. Starfield has made me more cynical about games media than any other game in the past decade.
theyre 100% bought and paid for..same as movie reviewers. Criticise and your company doesnt get ad money. And you dont get flown out to conventions and recieve free games etc
Nobody is paid off. They are afraid of the audience.
@@msventurellifinally someone gets it! These reviewers don’t pander to the devs, they pander to their audiences!
@@msventurelli They most definitely are paid off lmfao. It was proven earlier this year. They get paid anywhere from $50-100 per positive review. They don't give 2 fucks about the consumers. They just want to line their pockets
Because Journalists aren't really the bastion of free speech and press they should be. If you want to be black-pilled about it, a combination of corporate and social interests preclude most journalists from being able to speak their mind from fear of being cut off from the teat of advertising, being able to interview, etc.
You just can't stray too far from the approved corporate narrative that has been agreed upon as safe otherwise you affect the bottom line. It's gotten so bad most places just hire people willing to censor themselves and tow the line.
It's not really fixable. Social systems just shift the pressure from the corporate narrative to the state narrative. Independent journalism gives you freedom, but you're a lot more vulnerable.
I just can't believe that Bethesda finally had the chance, in over 20 years, to make something that wasn't either Elder Scrolls or Fallout related, and THIS is what they settled with
They shouldn't make anything that isn't TES or fallout though. And they sure as hell should have not chose a space game. They lost their minds releasing crap like starfield into a realm of games like warframe, star citizen, mass effect trilogy, and destiny.
I have 141 hours into the game. I beat the main quest in the first 48 hours and then grinded the main story running through every single artifact collection mission until I restarted the story 10 times in a row to get the final armor. There has never been a game that has required so much work for so little reward. There is absolutely no point beating the main quest more than once.
Because they literally expected the community to work for free and make the game for em. No denying this...
Everyone: Starfield is bad, this is what’s wrong with it
Bethesda: NU UHH
There is a bit of truth to that. Though "bad" is not accurate. Starfield is deeply flawed, like a gem dipped in shit. For some reason Bethesda refuses to wash off the shit and wants to leave that to modders.
Good for them they can lose money and fans while we laugh
a principal skinner moment
@@captainpandabear1422But that's the thing, it's not a gem, you can smear all the shit around and eat it, you will not find a gem in there.
Skyrim was a great sandbox for modders. It was more than good enough to attract hoards of people even as the base game. I played Daggerfall, and can say that it looks like they thought you know what let's combine the worst of all our games, let us make a procedurally generated game with tons of loading screens, and those loading screens load nothing but, and while we are at it, let's use the most dumbed down rpg system without any custom spells and features, and how about making 10 steps back regarding combat while we are at it, let's just make 2 guns and reskin them 500 times. Oh, I almost forgotten, don't let us forget to make the least interesting stories, remove enemy variety, let us make the game with "high graphical fidelity"™ but let's make the characters look hideous and uncanny so they are an insult to the people they are modeled after!
Enough of my rant. I don't expect that modders will save the game, there are better games there. Yes, even Skyrim. There were a lot of reasons to switch from Oblivion to Skyrim but there is nothing Starfield brings to the table.
@@captainpandabear1422bruh there ain't a single gem to be found in the ankle deep ocean of diarrhea that is starfield.
I always felt Starfield's quality would be a decent indicator for TES VI. I am now terrified for Elder Scrolls.
Bethesdas ego thought they could handle multiple ips at once when they can’t even release a bug free stable game once a decade. No hope for es6. Starfield was a massive waste of the past decade+ to satiate their egos. Which would’ve been fine if it was fucking good
This game made me lost all interest in the upcoming game. I just can't look past the flaws anymore looking forward to The Witcher 4 tho.
People been saying Bethesda has been on the decline since Skyrim (because compared to morrowind, Skyrim doesn’t have a lot of roleplay, too much handholding, dumbing down of skills/experience/quests). Where tf yall been at?
Yep. If you think Elder Scrolls 6 won;t have a loading screen when you enter a house or a dungeon you're out of you mind.
I still have hope for TES, as its one big open world. A lot of the faults from Starfield don't translate to it.
"The real life astronauts probably weren't bored on the moon, therefore our aggressively mediocre and empty game isn't boring" is probably the silliest argument I've ever heard. 😂
When I play Kerbal Space Program, the planets are barren but I’m engaged because the process of getting to another planet is a huge challenge. The real life astronauts were in a more extreme version of that.
When you can fast travel to a planet, it kind of removes the interesting bits.
That was the wildest effing "argument". How detached from reality do you think your playerbase is Bethesda? You know the big difference between real life astronauts and in-game ones? REAL LIFE!
It's f'n wild. Why didn't they just make a realistic, real time Apollo mission game, then? Because it would obviously be boring af.
Astronauts were at least able to land their ship here.
@@_Just_John landing a ship is not probably the greatest challenge. IMHO docking is far more difficult and dangerous. To your crew and the crew on the other ship or station.
Going back to 2003 and playing Star Wars Galaxies, I really felt small and insignificate exploring the 'original' planets (up to 100 sq miles) before speeders were added and before SoE added the 'themepark' planets. There is no way in hell that Starfield in 2023 (20 years later) can even come close to recreating that feeling. And there was a lot more to do on all the planets.
Knowing that as a Gunslinger/Musician/Trader I knew there was rare minerals on Dathomir, and that roaming rancors were around there was actually nerve wracking. Always watching all around as I dropped the Medium Harvesters, then racing back to the Star port were awesome times.
From what I’ve seen, Starfiled has nothing to match that visceral feeling of helplessness I felt then.
@@dextokuyasu Yep, as a MCH and Scout I would spend so much time out in the wilds camping, hunting down rares to tame and meat, etc. to sell to crafters. Heard rumor that SoE dumbed down the game mechanics/classes etc. due to the complexity of maintaining such code. Not sure if that was one of the reason for making it WoW in space. One would think they could recreate in2023 what made it special instead of all these pretty looking but simplistic MMO/RPGs (exclude BG3).
@@mughug9616unfortunately the audience for this type of game sis no there anymore. I didn't play SWG but I loved Ultima Online and Lineage 2 (less similar, but very political - open world FFA PvP, clans, alliances, rivalries, sabotage, betrayal and so on).
Try Elite Dangerous if you really want to feels small
Agree and love it. Just comparing a game 10 years older then Starfield and how little some so-called space games with planets to explore (and do something) have developed. :(@@Cessna172SNavIII
I was so blown away by Daggerfall and Morrowind. No other company was making games like this. That's the basis of love for their games, and the rest of the catalogue slowly leeched it out of me over the last 15 years or so
I've complained about how much they dumbed down the experience in Oblivion, Skyrim and Fallout 4 but they've gone off the deep end with this one, Starfield is just so devoid of actual content unlike their old games.
@@JudgeBreddUK i used to set aside days to play new Bethesda studio games. It was a great time, it's sad that they didn't evolve.
@@younahmsayin agreed completely, it's so sad how far they've fallen and to see them defending it is really weird
Daggerfall and Morrowind was innovative, daring, highly inspired and had masses of passion within it.
It slowly bled away with each release, But Fallout 3, oblivion and Skyrim was all fantastic games, no doubt about that.
Fallout 4 was controversial but still a brilliant game that I enjoyed.
But this has just fallen so far now. It's empty, it's devoid of passion and creativity, it's UI is awful.
It's just plain and boring.
It's a mediocre game at best but for a Bethesda game it is utterly terrible and very worrying for ES6
@JudgeBreddUK Bethesda is the king of marketing games that aren’t RPGs in any traditional sense as traditional RPGs. That may be a large chunk of why every Bethesda game seems somewhat underwhelming to me. I want more games like Kenshi where it’s an open ended story you craft where you could just kill every faction leader and create chaos if you want.
If Starfields caves and labs are engaging gameplay, then Elden Rings caves and catacombs are masterpieces of game design that should be studied and used as a baseline for what side content looks like.
Remnant 2's side dungeons might be my favorite side dungeon design in the last...5 years.
@@Deadsnake989 true they were really good. I was just comparing Elden rings because those were admittedly a bit of a slog, but nowhere near as repetitive and empty as starfield.
@@bediahvandougaljones I picked up on what you were saying. I just wanted to comment about how well I thought Remnant 2 did as an example of really good design. Honestly I thought the ER dungeons were alright for the most part, aside from a few exceptions that were awful. Your initial comment was spot on though. Elden Ring's dungeons, even the bad ones, are masterpieces when compared to Starfield dungeons.
There was one repeatable Starfield dungeon I did find cool though, the research tower. I thought it was well designed because it focused around a central hub area, that was a fun combat arena. As you progressed through the POI, that central area would have new doors open and new enemies flooded in. It got annoying seeing it literally 5 times in the same star system. But out of all the dungeons in that game, it's the only one I didn't hate running for loot. Mainly because it was so short.
If starfields labs and caves are engaging gameplay then Bloodbornes Chalice dungeons is the pinnacle of gaming and all games should have chalice dungeons. A lot of chalice dungeons. Maybe in the future bethesda will release a game that is only chalice dungeons strung together with no end.
@@foobar2027 wait... isnt that just fucking starfield outposts except waaaaaay worse?
All Starfield did for me was reaffirm and vindicate my appreciation for the original Mass Effect game and its planetary exploration.
Hell yeah!
I went and played Skyrim and New Vegas
Indeed
I always found ME1 exploration to be super chill and atmospheric. There were a couple of real pain in the ass planets but I also could’ve been less stubborn about driving directly up mountains.
@@spiraljumper74 the general atmosphere and different vibes of a lot of the planets honestly kept me invested even despite the “wasteland” criticism. And not to mention there was always something interesting on most of those worlds that made the investment worth it.
As a programmer, I can't blame the creation engine for feature or design problems. So many people assume that if it was made in unreal or unity it would fix missing features, or bad design decisions.
Too many people think that a different engine would allow seamless space-planet traversal, but here is the thing, that is not a native feature for any engine. Hello Games had to develop that feature for No Man's Sky, if Bethesda is not willing to put in the time it won't happen.
A different engine won't change the bad design decision such as poor UI design (which was mostly fixed by mods immediately after release). Or the incomplete combat design (I know it was designed by a different studio but it was not integrated well). Or the skill tree design, which locked players out from activities by having too many requirements on top of a leveling system and tree. I can go on.
I haven't even touched on the story or the amount of content made for the procedural generator to place.
Yeah and the issues with the creation engine is not that it was first built decades ago, the problem is that the continuous development hasn't been enough. It has huge technical debt which seemingly there's no interest to address. But it's their engine, they're the experts on it, they can develop the features they need assuming they have the resources to do so.
But ultimately the engine is not what makes a game good or bad.
Yeah they basically chose to make Skyrim in space, but didn't ask themselves if Skyrim in space would work.
"The bugs are better than the story" It's actually funny how true this is, my companion I would take him with me and the bugs kept getting worse and I made the inside joke to my friends that the space demons were possessing my companion and getting more and more control of him as the bugs got worse 🤣🤣 I found my companions possession story more compelling than any of the quest I did
I want a game like that now where the story is about you completely buggy companion lol
@@westernjustice3824 Yes and you spend the game trying to cure him of the bugs and he ends up being the final boss 👀👀👀
@@kohotokun or second option through dialog choices you can pull a screen from mass effect and have them off themself or purely save them
Fallout 76?
@@westernjustice3824 It's not exactly what you're suggesting, but Buddy Simulator 1984 kinda has a similar idea to it.
I remember when people use to complain about those who would only play a game for a few hours and criticize a game. They would instantly be shouted down for not experiencing the full package. Now we got people putting in dozens of hours and criticizing the game and now being accused of being delusional.
Well, damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you've got only a couple hours, it's like, "You've barely played the game! You can't criticize it, shut up!" while if you've got a few hundred, it's, "You played the game that much and you're telling other people not to play it?? LOL! What a clown!"
People on Steam are just brainless, at the end of the day. If I ever want to feel a little better about my own intelligence, all I have to do is open a popular game's review page and look at the comments on a negative review, lol
If you play a game for 100 hours then obviously you got your money's worth
@@darkfoxx87 aaaabsolutely not. this implies that the only value a game has is in *wasting your time*, which is complete horsecrap
@user-gt7vi9jm9m no, if you buy a 60 dollar game and play it for 10p hours then you got your money's worth or you are crazy
@darkfoxx87 the question was "is the game bad?" I made it to ng+ and decided it was not a good game. Mid at best.
Starfield, a realistic depiction of space and the emptiness of it. True immersion. The ultimate experience. You will feel like you're actually in empty space, everywhere you go.
Only this is not a real space. This is a game that should be interesting and exciting. And I’m sure that a real flight to boring, deserted, dull Mars would be a thousand times more exciting than a trip to Mars in Starfield.
yeah a cutscene every 5 seconds is super realistic fam.
more like nihilism simulator, you constantly question why you even play this game
Theres allready a HumanBase or a Cave with a Human Treasure in it on every Planet😂What the Peopel mean with Empty in StarField ..is more like Empty Emersion ...Zero Emersion for an SpaceThemed RPG full of Wannabe Realism ....it starts with Water and Face Physics..and ends with shooting with a PumpGun inside a SpaceShip 😂Feel the Emptyness of an RPG when it just play like a weak LootShooter with LoadingScreens for every Door..to load more Emptiness of BugTester "GameDesgin "Idias.
But there are settlement bases all over the place.
That's a HUGE problem with a lot of dialogue tags, is that they take you down a cul-de-sac, and the conversation will never start, or end, differently, regardless of the tags you have.
I think that's one reason BG3 got so huge, is that your dialogue tags can result in entirely different gameplay.
Cyberpunk also had some dynamic dialogue situations and your perks, abilities and experience points actually mattered. If you were way too overpowered in terms of strength, enemies could get intimidated and run away. I entered some cafe and a robbery encounter happened, I flexed my tech to the 3 robbers and they dipped LMAO. 🤣
@@ivanaleksandartsanev1693 It's funny because I usually don't compare CP77 to Starfield, because it's just too unfair heh. While it had a rough launch CP77 now feels like one of the more cutting edge current gen games, while Starfield feels like an old last gen.
So the game I usually compare it to is the AA title, Outer Worlds, and even Outer Worlds had dialogue with real consequence. And skill based options. I also loved that you could alter your reputation based on those choices, so you may opt to use a skill based dialogue, but you know you'll still be hurting your reputation with a faction. And again, that's a AA game from 5 years ago.
With CP77, they're just not even in the same league. Conversations have such a different flow in CP77, you know, they feel real. Not just someone always standing at attention, giving you a blank stare.
I also love the little details, like when you first meet Evelyn at Lizzie's, when you approach the bar, she's talking with Judy, who then leaves, and this is all before you even know who either of them are. That's immersion.
@@sydhamelin1265 Or the first time seeing Panam and Nash in the Afterlife, without knowing the story. Meeting all the different characters like Rogue, all with different personalities, vibes and like you said, encounters always feeling natural. CP2077 came at the worst time in my opinion, because I personally don't remember such a weird time for technology, having very old and very new-gen tech at the same time and trying to cater to everyone, which is literally impossible. If they had discarded old-gen, the game would have never had such a bad release, in my opinion.
@@ivanaleksandartsanev1693 Yeah, that's another really great moment. It speaks to why the game is worth replaying over and over.
And definitely good point about the timing. Releasing a game during a gen upgrade is going to be impossible to please both sides.
Yeah Larian does dialogue tags mattering well. Heck divinity 2 you can’t even Ally with the void unless you are undead so you just can’t get that ending if you chose to be a female lizard because you wanted to flirt with that one guard
Starfield's infuriating lack of roleplay options and choice-based outcomes is so weird because its NG+ system is explicitly designed for replaying the game with choice variance. However, because there's almost no roleplaying options nor choice-based outcomes that change anything, there's no reason to go to NG+ because there's nothing different to do or choose.
So true. No decision trees, no player impact on the world.
I'm not attempting to justify anything, but I think what happened is that because Skyrim was carried so far with the mod community that they were hoping that whatever they did the users would just keep it running indefinitely. A sandbox is only good if it has the toys to play in it.
@@aesop2733Skyrim had a lot of problems but it was commercially successful because they watered down the rpg elements so much from previous games that anyone could play it. This is just them continuing that trend to an extreme level
They built in New-Game Plus into the story, yet forgot to add the reason for player to do it lol
there is ton of roleplay options though... and decisions that have consequences... maby not in the actual campaign quest but other quests do. it proves my point about how none of you actually play the game and just jump on bandwagons
I finished Starfield's main story and a load of side quests into new game plus 3 or 4 on two characters. The dev comment about it being different and better is pure gaslighting. Starfield makes Fallout 4 look like a masterpiece. I'm glad I got access via Game Pass.
That is time you’ll never get back
"Starfield makes Fallout 4 look like a masterpiece." Holy shit
@@MrTaylork1think about how much of your life you wasted making these comments. Its the exact same thing monkey🤣
Very true
Starfield sitting at an 83, 1 point below New Vegas which resulted in Bethesda withholding a bonus to Obsidian feels poetic
it is both poetic and pathetic
Which is insane bc Obsidian is legitimately such a strong studio, it blows my mind they weren’t involved with either Starfield OR Fo4. Both games would’ve been better 😭
Obsidian basically gave them the framework for a proper fallout rpg but we got 4 instead 😂
Ive been saying for 10 years Bethesda needs to give Fallout to Obsidian to make and just help with technically stuff if anything while Bethesda studios just focus on TES with some help from Obsidian to implement RPG stuff. I think TES 6 is doomed unless they either get a new engine and or go back to their roots about 25 years. @@compostsmurf5519
@@compostsmurf5519 What do you mean? Fallout 4 had a whole weapon-modding system! You can craft ammunition!
Dialogue choice in Tyranny: Sparta kick an enemy off of the top of a tower, to their death.
Dialogue choice in The Elder Slop: Jedi mind tricks, +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1
asmon hit the nail on the head at the end here. exactly what i've been saying for years. its the ppl that went thru "game design school" with 0 actual creative ability that have turned gaming into what it is today.
I don't know, maybe. I do think most of the problems with modern gaming come from the higher ups. Not the devs.
I don't think that's completely true. When you have hundreds of people working on a single product you end up with a sort of auteur project where a small handful of project leads provide a vision for everyone else to follow, and while yes, those people come up from the development team, they're still beholden to the wants of an executive suite that wants to control budget and timelines, and that leads to crunch and unfinished products. And some of that is unavoidable, especially in smaller studios where money is tighter. That's definitely not the case here, but I do believe many of these devs would have preferred to push back release until they had something worth people's money, but they don't have any say, especially in a big studio like Bethesda. Thor from Pirate Software has talked about how awful a work environment Blizzard was under Activision. And one of the things that made it so awful is that there was an atmosphere of "you are replaceable, you make dogshit wages because this was your dream job, and someone else wants it if you don't."
Plus, legitimately qualified creatives keep leaving big studios either on their own, or are pushed out because they're too expensive, which leads to run-of-the-mill developers getting pushed up beyond their capability, to become the new creative minds of the studio when they objectively aren't ready or able.
Have a look at Bethesda dev group photos from Morrowind/Oblivion days. Then look at dev group photos now. You'll see a glaring difference. The modern obsession with 'inclusivity' rather than passion and talent has included a whole bunch of Karens, who kill creativity with their finger-wagging neo-puritanism. It's the elephant in the room. You'll see exactly the same trend with every single franchise that has been 'safe spaced' and made boring in the past decade or so. "Put a chick in it and make her gay, and lame".
@paulw5039 if this is true, it explains a lot, because the same happened to Blizzard with Diablo and WoW.
The main quest pretty much tell people that don't bother building a base, a spaceship or care about the people on the planet. Because you lose everything when go to a new system. All the things you collected is gone, the weapon you built is gone. So you really should ignore everything in the main story because its just not worth saving it.
I wonder how Starfield would have been if they just focused on the Sol system. You fly between plants manually or with fast travel, every planet has an extremely unique aesthetic or biome, and Earth is the primary civilization where you'd find all the best vendors and stuff
It would have still sucked because the writing is insultingly condescending and lame.
Starfield should've told only the story about how somehow, a singular Earth government united the planet enough to create a spacefleet, house and leave the planet. There is so many obvious story threads there for an amazing game. Factions that simply refuse to leave (and potentially can be visited later, having survived), your character having to choose to snuff them out or otherwise pacify them in order to create the "unified" message. Obviously the entire Earth's population couldn't have been transported. What about those that wanted to go, but couldn't (ala vaults in Fallout)? Would the USA//Israeli government REEAAAAALLY be all that interested in flying Muslims to space with them? etc, etc, etc. I mean even IN GAME - surely your character doesn't believe that a "few ships" of people who went missing magically created an entire civilization of their own, worshipping a space snake, that was able to go to war with the remaining surviving ships (I believe it was 3 ships that went missing, out of 10 total ships?) and actually threaten them meaningfully even post-terraforming and extended population growth after the exiting said ships. There is so much obvious room for subterfuge and "things aren't as they seem" like in Fallout but Starfield has... none. Everything is completely at face value. It's baffling.
The fact they wrote a shockingly convoluted "space magic" plot for the game that takes place **AFTER** a bunch of extremely interesting events is comically frustrating. Apart form the fact that Starfield is a game no one wanted, that has no target audience, and no draw. It was never a high-tech next-gen game. It isn't a voxel-baxed creator game, it isn't Elder Scrolls, and it isn't brave enough to do anything interesting like above in a way that Cyberpunk or Deus Ex has in the past. The game was made for no one, and people unironically bought this piece of shit AND still have the gall to tell me that it's good. lmao. Keep CONSOOMING, losers.
No man sky does this way better then Starfield evendo hello games studio is very small when compare to Bethesda
Still, Bethesda once again showed how horribly untalented they are when it comes to story telling. Sol or 1k planets doesnt matter. They can continue writing trash apolitical stories all they want.
They could've made it akin to The Expanse universe slightly altered. Have each of the (not extremely hostile) moons and planets be colonized, have Mars be terraformed, all kinds of interesting solar politics and wars and stuff, and then some alien twist in the story
Halo Guns cooler than all the weapons in Starfield:
Energy sword
Fuel rod cannon
Gravity hammer
Needler
Plasma Pistol
Heatwave
Boltshot
SRS99C(sniper rifle)
As someone who has recently got back into playing Morrowind, its so sad to see how far Bethesda has fallen. They used to make such amazing games.
I reinstalled The Outer Worlds and Skyrim just to make sure I wasn't hallucinating. Those games are so much better than Starfield, it's just bonkers.
@@EricMalette Wasn't The Outer Worlds made by Obsidian, not Bethesda?
Morrowind is the only game bethesda has made that could be considered good
@@DozleZabithats it. They made one good game 25 years ago and they're still trying to run the same schtick. They didnt even change the engine since then, thats how much they live in the past
@@HO1ySh33t Of course. But just in terms of the evolution of RPG gaming, I reinstalled it to get a feel for how it compared to Starfield. It really is the closest in terms of its setting and genre.
I don't believe for a second that Bethesda didn't know they were releasing a bad game.
They thought the mod community would fix it for them.
That is just sad, if it's true lol@@Ukaran
I think so. But the crew were also aware that this is Todd's pet project, so they daren't say anything bad about it, and go out of their way to justify its shortcomings.
@@RickReasonnzMicrosoft should have delayed it. Hope they kept the receipt!
Problem with Bethesda is this... They was good at making games years ago when not so many others was... But everyone got better and everyone learned how to make good games and how Bethesda is being left behind and not able to keep up anymore but because they built a good rep from years ago people still. Hold onto hope.
I think that's what it is as well. Bethesda simply lacks the skill to make good games in the modern era. They're so out of touch nowadays
Yeah i think starfield would have been fine if it was released 12 years ago. But for a game in 2023, it feels like a 12 year old mediocre game
This is how Blizzard is nowadays too, it's kind of sad seeing studios like this. It's like a guy who won the football championship in high school, but that was 20 years ago and now he works at a waffle house and all he has is nostalgia.
Ur words fit perfectly even if you switch the company name to blizzard. It feels like these companies got too big and they lost what made them good in the first place.
This game was designed around making players play as long as possible so that it would look good on paper for shareholders.
If there were more factions in the game along with maybe repercussions for being with certain factions then it would've added so much depth to the game. I feel like the only "repercussions" you have in the story is if you side with the Fleet then people will talk bad about you subtly but nothing changes really. They made like 3 interesting towns/ planets but everything felt so segmented to me. I kind of enjoyed the story the first time but after ng+ it's so much more boring than Skyrim or FO4
I ended up doing those missions to sabotage the space pirates, I got on the ship and was being shown around and standing there as they blathered on to each other because it wasn't as if the game was going to have them say anything useful in these expository scenes, I had a thought. "I'm right here with all the leaders of the space pirates and I have enough guns and bombs to level Israel." so I started blasting and mowed down every npc in my path, except for the leaders, it turns out they are essential and can't die, so there was no choice in what you can do, you can't just kill them, you can't take them into custody, blow up the Space Pirate Headquarters and then bring an end to the entire faction right then and there, no you have to play it the Bethesda way.
It's like that in EVERY. SINGLE. MISSION. You play them the scripted way and you don't get to make any choices because none of it matters.
And everyone is such a whiny bitch, you join the main plot faction, can't even remember what they are called and they talk about how you have freedom to get things done, they have a space pirate and psycho snake cultist in their group but all of them get pissy if you do anything illegal.
I played a lot of starfield and the biggest problem to me is I can't find the hand crafted content, just repeated space bandit camps with no unique weapons or items and just empty space where you run around and watch your stamina metar drain until you give up and fast travel back to your ship
Morrowind had so many cool hidden items , how did they fuck it up so badly
@MrRafagigapr and morrowind had an excellent story. It is me or is Bethesda's games get worse in quality of writing over each game? Morrowind being the best then oblivion being good. Everything after is average.
@@MrRafagigapr Money. It's really as simple as that. It took a while for money people to understand video games enough to get in to the industry after it had grown to billions. But now they have, and there is no passion or creativity involved in their decisions. They don't treat it as a creative work, they treat it as a product that is mass-produced in a factory. And Starfield exemplifies this concept. Totally bland, and missing anything that makes you feel any sort of attachment to the game, but still somewhat of a functioning product.
Exactly! From Morrowind through Skyrim, the design seemed more focused on world building which leads to immersive gameplay. StarField feels more gameified on multiple levels. Like they took the scan idea from NMS, but it doesn't fit the NASA-punk theme at all. Every world has bandits or bugs everywhere so the player has something to fight. You rarely find amazing hand-crafted vistas like you would find all over Skyrim. It feels like the scope just may have been way too much for giving it the Elder Scrolls or even Fallout treatment. They literally reached for the stars when they probably should have just started with a single well-crafted planet and then expanded from there with DLC.
They expected modders to complete their game
They should have kept it in the "sol system" like the expanse. Made each planet or moon you can land on have good details and have I different vib about each place. I think that would've worked much better. And felt a bit more like a bethesda game.
I was thinking this as well the other day. A much tighter focus and locations that people know and are interested in visiting. 98% of Starfield locations are pointless and a waste of time.
Bro literally just described no man’s sky lmao.
Could you imagine The Expanse: The Game (but done in a way where it's not just some crappy film tie in). Like a proper action RPG between three major factions. The two large ones at war and the smaller one caught in the middle vying for independence. Honestly, it's like Fallout New Vegas in space. Then you have alien stuff as the mysterious x-factor. Damn. If only Starfield had been something like that.
This is what outer wilds did. Each planet was cool. Instead there are 1000 trash planets.
1000 planets at first sounds far more appealing then 10 planets. 10 planets sounds like its only a few hours of Fun, while 1000 planets sounds like Hundreds of hours of fun.
19:07 "you'll essentially just phase through a jpeg"
Bethesda: "Its a PNG!!!😠"
The astronauts on the moon weren't dropped their though a cut scene and then left to stand around for a few hours before taking another cut scene home. They actually had shit to do the whole time. You can't compare the two like what the fuck.
I love Borderlands 2. I always play Gaige. I always give her the same skillset. I still enjoy playing it over and over. Changing your character and skillset are not gonna fix a boring ass game
This guy Gaiges!
Also my favourite to play by far, and of the dozen or so times I've played Borderlands 2 I've almost always been Gaige or Axton. I've tried everyone else but it just doesn't click the same.
I always play Krieg, always on his ultra-psycho melee build. I’ve been doing it for years. Borderlands 2 is such a cozy game for me.
biggest problem for me was that I am forced to be this awesome happy hero with happy people around me and even enemies are good guys. I want to turn the world into Warhammer and be the damn emperor in it.
Nha why not go full BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!
Satan... Is that you?
The key takeaway for gam devs behind games like Starfield and No Man's Sky is that sometimes bigger maps arent better. A well developed playing area is key to a good gaming experience.
I really hope gaming as a whole starts moving away from open world. If you don't have anything worth putting in that big space, don't fucking have the space at all. I'd rather have a good, focused linear narrative than vast fields of nothing with the occasional crafting supply to dot the landscape.
yup this. Even bethesda abandoned endless autogenerated worlds early in the elder scrolls
Open world like Skyrim? Yes. Open world limited to a few hundert meters per cell with a lucky singular POI out of 5 available which don't even provide small differences, no story and no reason to be there? No.
It's 2023. Two people working on a low budget game solve this better than Bethesda did.
tbf modern NMS doesnt market itself like starfield did. NMS knows its empty but its map is absolutely gigantic so its still fun just going to star-systems to see what cool planets there are. Starfield not only doesnt have a map big enough to justify the lack of content but all the planets suck and don't have the same effect that seeing a 10 meter big dinosaur bird fly around a radioactive mountain does in NMS.
Deus Ex handled it with the opposite approach: take a city block or two, and stuff it with life. Small map, but there's so much to do you tend to overlook or ignore it
I mean spore did this concept fairly well, some planets even had they’re own civilizations and you could go to war with those developed nations
I was thinking about playing it on release, but then I read what others had to say about it, and thus I never played it. A very good decision.
It'll be a good game to pirate and mod in a year or so, besides that I doubt Bethesda will improve it.
You probably had to use that decision again in future AAA games, especially the next TES 6.
Never go by others. You'll end up missing a ton of good games simply because some streamer made it popular to whine about a given game. If you don't want to buy the game blind, then get a month of gamepass to try it out first for minimum cost. Or wait till people do lets plays and watch an episode (never watch the first episode if you want to minimize spoilers for yourself) What others think means next to nothing. What you think matters. Never ever base what you think on others opinions of something.
@@ponjun3970TES6 is in development a year before starfield's release so that means it is still using the creation engine 💀
@@LabelsAreMeaningless Buy? Nah I was gonna pirate it, but I felt it wasn't even worth pirating. The stuff that people didn't like was things that I wouldn't have liked either. For example I didn't play Cyberpunk on release because others said it was a buggy mess, and I agreed, so I waited a year until they fixed the bugs and then I had a great time with it.
Me: I'm bored.
Bethesda: No you're not.
Me: Yes. I'm bored.
Bethesda: No. You're not bored.
Me: Pretty sure I'm bored.
Bethesda: You think you are, but you're not.
Me: Not this again.
This is accurate 😂😂
Sounds like how blizzard treated people when they said “you think you want it but you don’t know what you want”.. BROTHERRRR
@@hypnoticflower3152is this some out of season April fools joke??
What both Yong and Asmon are not pointing out here is WHY Bethesda is responding to reviews. The response system gives Bethesda the last word on the review, and they hope that recency bias will make readers see the review as less negative. They don't care about the opinion of the reviewer.
No amount of perceived effort put into responding to negative reviews would change the score, especially if anyone actually reads the responses in detail.
That works until you remember "we aren't planning on doing anything about it" is a thing they said in response to another controversy about a certain bag.
Anyone that cared left long ago.
A good point. If you can't fight the waves, then divert the waves. In this case the diverted waves are those who lazily skims through the reviews.
if that's the reason then that is woefully wrong any sort of recency bias would be dwarfed by the novelty of the developer getting into the weeds with these online arguments
I can't comment on what their motivations are but this isn't a good look for them, regardless. Nobody who actually looks at the reviews is going to overlook how tone-deaf this is.
I don't think i ever played starfield sober. I was stoned every single time and it was still boring
I think the issue is the game philosophy as a whole. The game was made with modders in mind and while a sandbox is a great idea, it’s almost like the game was reliant on mods in general. Skyrim of course would eventually be modded but the game is still fundamentally a good game with good story, a timeless landscape, and amazing atmosphere that just draws you to get lost in. I NEVER felt that way with Starfield. It’s as if Bethesda was banking on the idea that the game would be “finished” with mods. I still regularly play Skyrim often but sad to say I haven’t touched Starfield since it’s second week. I thought one mission was alright but there’s genuinely nothing that’s keeping me motivated to return to the game in any way
The lead writer Emil thinks he’s smart for saying that “gamers don’t care about a complex story” as though that’s a valid reason to not try.
@@TheGallantDrake'Member, the GoTY had a shit bland story Emil, you 'member???
Also, i love how they're going about telling players how they should feel while ignoring their feedback, pure arrogance from the developers.
I loved skyrim because I could run around and cause problems blowing up NPCs with fireballs, hoarding cheese wheels, watching goofy ass npc ragdoll physics, and generally just head out and do my own thing for hours on end and slowly complete the quests. The bar for experimentation was pretty low and you could do a lot in the open world that had NO LOADING SCREENS. It wasn't complicated, it wasn't difficult, but it was still fun to play around in.
I love how the responses from the Devs all sound like investor meeting talking points... Explanations by people who don't play games to people who also don't play video games...
The developer responses are like those responses you see from the brand on Amazon products. But instead of the brand apologizing and trying to solve your issue, it's the engineer of the product replying to tell you that you just don't understand how great their can opener is, even if the wheel doesn't turn, you get extra play time from poking each hole individually and it also has a fold out corkscrew on the handle.
For all the flaws Fallout 4 had, and it had many, often glaring ones. I still had a lot of fun playing it. I'd often just be roaming the world and seeing what crazy nonsense would happen. Things like traveling through a section of Boston I knew were hotspots for events. And often times just walking into 2-3 factions spawning events at the same time, resulting in a huge firefight. I've never really experienced any emergent gameplay like that from Starfield. It's always the same 4 scripted pirate events I've seen 20 other times.
They are getting close to gaslighting in their responses if you ask me.
Hey, question: Do they not seem AI-generated to anyone else? Is it just me?
This are also very common on googleplay store, developers often respond to the negative comments on their shitty p2w mobile game. They will comment saying such as "I'm sorry that our product didn't meet your expectation. We will continue to improve and do better." It's a strategy to downplay the negative comments and to show they acknowledge the problem and fix them. No they don't care about the negative comments, it's just all smokes.
In Bestheda case, it's worse. They aren't there smokes the new players, they literally saying "you are wrong, we are not fixing the game and here is how you should play it". They made unhappy players having less hope for their next title. Also Driving away new players with their attitude.
@@SeventhSolar This is very likely a AI response but there is now way to prove it absolutely.
i love how the dev feedback to REVIEWS is basically the sales pitch for people who haven't played the game.
I’ve never had second hand embarrassment this badly for a dev studio. At least blizzard had the wherewithal to drop to their knees and apologize, even if it was just to save face.
Hey what about bioware with Andromeda ? Same shit and now this company DEAD
"Don't u guys all have RTX5090?"
-Blizzard Executives...
Bro just casually taught me a new word
Sadly, I have ONE SINGLE good thing to say about Starfield and it’s subjective… : I really really loved the color grading and general ambiance and tech design they went for. A bit too repetitive at times, but that kind of high fine tech, spacecore, sometimes somewhat retrofuture design was exactly what I was waiting for. And the noisy washed out image seemed like a old sci-fi space movie and I loved it. Along with some of the musics, I sometimes really enjoyed some feelings it gave me. « NASA punk » as they said, I loved that. But that’s purely subjective.
But that’s literally all… that’s important, but as everything else is falling apart, it’s not enough at all.
I agree, loading screens didn’t kill the game at all. No weapon crafting (only accessories, not even that interesting for most of them), annoying skill tree progression, boring exploration, boring combat most of the time, annoying xp progression, boring af main story, not enough different dugeons at all.
Man for dungeons it’s literally playing the same 5-6 same dungeons again and again… when you see how many there was in Skyrim that’s depressing. They somewhat made it more boring than No Mans Sky which has less dungeons… I don’t know how they did that, that’s actually pretty impressive lol.
One of the biggest issues I have with exploring planets is that there is only ever ONE or TWO interesting areas to explore but they are like almost a kilometer away from point A to B and you cant fly your ship to even get there. You are forced to just go by foot and Bethesda stated they will never add land vehicles cause you already have one which is your ship and that is so dumb to me.
It's so obvious that this is just a cashgrab. And now they're defending their title to avoid lawsuits. All because they wanted easy money.
@@Lufanoswhat would there be to sue over? Are they guilty of false marketing?
@@Lufanosno it's just out of touch devs. They clearly did a fuck ton of work and it just isn't good. There isn't some big conspiracy other than half truths by marketing
So, instead of them taking accountability that their game sucks, we can expect the same level and care and quality going forward with their future projects? Nice, now I can basically totally give up on them as devs.
If you didn't give up after Skyrim, Fallout 4, and Fallout 76, why quit now. 😂, it's not like Starfield is that much worse than any of these
@@veila0924 skyrim was good, fo4 was decent, fo76 was garbage. I didn't try starfield and won't.
I mean, After Fallout 76 I wrote them off.
@@veila0924 skyrim is goated are you cooked?
@@RedStarGypsysouls like fanboys bruh
It's funny how starfield only gains attention again by people saying how bad it still is.
It's simply a trend that people are jumping on. Most of the noise comes from people copying whatever their chosen streamer said. Just watch. Whenever a streamer decides to dump on any game with a hot take, everyone piles on. Most have never even played.
@@LabelsAreMeaninglessNah the game is genuinely boring and lazy
@@jaydub2546 he's not wrong though. The game is bad yeah but that doesn't mean he's wrong. Most people didn't play the game because it was bad and people trashed on it which became a trend. Which is normal.
Yeah I spent a good 100 hours and the new game Plus and felt robbed of currency and guns taken away I kept playing, and was at the point where I wanted to play straight evil and couldn't do that at certain times, then yes I was bored after that.
@@LabelsAreMeaninglessignore ALL the reviews with hundred(s) of hours saying it’s bad. Nah gotta be the streamers fault.
15:28 It looks like Skyrim in space
Most people were too dazzled by Skyrim's scenery to realize how bad the combat was
There's a reason why Stealth Archer is the perfect build in Skyrim. The enemies are just too dumb to notice you and you can just... remote shank them.
Which ES game has the best combat? I’ve only played Skyrim
@@jj-ij1kz Not sure! There is probably video footage of each game on UA-cam, so you could probably figure it out
@@miguelito2361 yeah should’ve done that before ig lol
The world-building in Starfield is so haphazard and bizarre. I saw a funny twitter thread of people just throwing out all these random elements of civilization and culture that they just hadn’t thought to include.
Like the first city having no walls it just... ends. Literally skyscrapers in a forest lmao.
@@acourierofourhopesandaamer8303I posted something like this on a Reddit the other day….New Atlantis is meant to be the peak of human technology and civilisation but it’s just buildings surrounded by wilderness. Like did we not bother to populate this planet!? 😂
I am entertained by Starfield, Todd trying to laugh the tears of tragic rage out of himself, while every other nominee whisks away awards during the events this week.
Todd and company can hang out with the Spiderman devs.
for real tho, the awards given out to the nominees were sensible and fair.
not surprised Starfield didnt make the cut anywhere, and i hate to admit that, but it is what it is
@@timvoorhees8102 if starfield would have won something i would have been outrage
@@Aranak777 considering the clear cut line up this year, there would have alot of questions that would have to be answered.
The community religated starfield to a strong MID and i havent heard anyone say otherwise in a reasonable way
I was thinking about playing a bit today, I still have it installed with about 15 mods, and I was looking over Nexus for ship mods and thought about downloading one for cool looking custom ship habs, sounds cool right? make your own luxury yacht in the game, decorate it with the house/outpost tools.... well, except, I mean, think about it: why do you need a ship? literally, in a space game, WHY does it even have space ships? and that may seem like a stupid question, I mean, its a space game, right? except no. the ship is a fast travel beacon and thats it. you board your ship, go right to the bridge, sit down, warp to your location, and, hell, if its a spot on a planet youve been to, like the New Atlantis shipyard, you just appear outside your already landed ship. think about it, you'll NEVER sleep in the captains quarters, you'll NEVER use your ships work benches, you literally cant interact with the items in the ship anyway, the monitors are purely decorative, you cant turn the fans on or off, you cant lift weights.... no, you board your ship, hit fast travel, and thats it.
mods cant fix that. this game CANT EVEN be saved by the mods because all a mod can do is enhance whats in the game, its fundamentally broken and feature absent to the point where new or different after market content cant help it. I mean, take the ship example and expand it to EVERY aspect of the game; you cant enhance a procedurally generated generic moon, you cant enhance a useless outpost system and make outposts somehow relevant.
no, they did the impossible, make a game so hollow and shit WE cant even help it. its utterly DOA
I logged 120 hours on Starfield in the first two weeks. I’ve never even completed the main story. I got totally lost in the vehicle ship building trying to build the coolest and strongest ship possible. Most of my time was spent in the builder or the menus trying to get to places. I finally built this awesome ship and spent 4 hours trying to find a ship fight. And then it was just over in 10 seconds. And then I asked myself… am I having fun? No… and I uninstalled the game and haven’t touched it since launch.
The fact that I was more engaged with the drums playing in the background, than I was watching the final boss of one of the most anticipated games of the year, is fucking hilarious.
Mass effect had elevator problems and I still loved it. The story was amazing. Load screens would not be an issue if I am blown away when it comes up.
It misses the biggest Bethesda hook that make their games fun. You might get a quest that is just to kill a boss in a cave. But you can spend 2 hours getting to the quest location because there is so much interesting stuff to find on the way. Starfield gets rid of that, destroying the whole Bethesda formula that gets you hooked. I feel they do not understand anymore what made their games fun.
This. Exploration and interesting locations are non existent in Starfield. That's why I stopped playing after 3 hours.
It’s ok D4 is a franchise killer if people actually had standards. These games will continue to be made shitty when people keep buying a shiny new 💩
@@thedonzhorzh That's unfortunate. I played through NG+ 1 and then a little bit after that. I wanted to make sure I consumed the story. And I had a good time doing that. I agree there is a whole bunch of "empty" but you can easily not let that ruin your play experience. Plenty of other stuff to do for longer than 3 hours.
@@genereynoldsactual It's just boring to me. 1000 planets and all you do when you land on any of them is scan for pois and walk in straight line for 5 minutes with nothing to distract you. Don't care about the story in a Bethesda game. Exploration is almost non existent compared to The Elder Scrolls or Fallout. Also, the game just feels like it came out 12 years ago. Nothing next gen about loading screens every 5 minutes. I have seen a lot of videos with high level characters and nope, it doesn't seem to get that much better.
I think you're right, they just don't understand their own thing anymore. Half the fun in Bethesda games used to be just walking in a direction and finding stuff.
The biggest concern in this situation is the realization that Bethesda just won't listen to fans and fix their games. Yeah, NMS was not great at launch, Cyberpunk 2077 wasn't great at launch. But you know why they're good today? Because the devs listened. NMS devs went silent for a long time and kept working on updates to make the game better. CD Projekt Red said, "We're sorry players don't like Cyberpunk", and then went silent and came back with the 2.0 and completely remade the game essentially. They didn't try to play mind-tricks with the fanbase trying to justify the game's shortcomings. They didn't say "oh the lack of vehicle combat is by design because it's realistic", "oh there is a lot of tech needed to render each and every NPC AI properly". They just acknowledged the bad release, and went to working on it to fix it.
Bethesda just doesn't wanna listen to criticism. All these years of putting Todd on a pedestal has ensured that they're convinced they can do no wrong. Which is why now, when they HAVE done something wrong, they just try to play mind-games and loops to somehow convince the player that the problem is the player not the game.
What a damn mess.
Cyberpunk was bugged as hell for too many people at launch, but the game didn’t change much before the DLC update. And even, aside from the skill tree not a lot has completely changed.
But NMS is a good example yeah. CP too but not as much.
Honestly the funnest times I've had with Bethesda games have been when I tried to do Skyrim without fast travel, without any of the exploits for leveling on Legendary difficulty (honestly, which they had a mode more like survival mode where enemies weren't just hit sponges), and Fallout 4 survival. The main reason is that both would force me to actually learn what was where, think about paths because I new that X enemy was blocking my way, stuff like that. Starfeild just... I don't think I could ever sink the same amount of time that I've put into other Bethesda games
Exactly, fast travel quickly kills most of the fun in their games. Exploration and wandering around between destinations and discovering random stuff is what made it immersive. Especially with mods like Immersive world Encounters with tons of new quests and npcs fully voice acted.
Starfield on the other hand is built on constantly fast-traveling (their outdated engine demands it), and any exploration involves landing on rng planets where you just get a mix of POIs pulled from a small handful of identical locations. "And there's going to be a pistol in that locker over there... yep." I was pretty much done when I read the same data pads from the same people, on completely different planets lol, like wtf? At that point I was like "Yeah, fuck this". Outside of the quests themselves, it's just one big uninspired mess.
I think you've nailed it here, I played hours of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim just walking around without a specific plan, the same again with the Fallout games. You have absolutely no incentive to do that in Starfield, I started playing thinking I'd be exploring space Bethesda style but it wasn't anything like those games.
Remember that early reviews were giving it 10/10 and people got their pitchforks out when the first 7/10 came out.
Either they were scared of the playerbase or just took Bethesda marketing speak / potential as promises for later in the game.
All the issues can be identified within the first couple hours or playing but people kept hyping each other up under the guise of 'the next Skyrim'
People jumped between the main faction missions, which provide a good 30 - 40 hours of content.
Barely any location-dependent side quests encourage exploration because it's all tied into the main faction content. The game gives directions, and random stuff on planets that are hand-crafted or meaningful is rare. You can look up "Side Quests," but nearly all of them are actually in the major faction cities or a few major planets that are part of the significant faction storylines, meaning all the other worlds are vacant; there is no point in "exploring" outside of the cities. It would be best to explore all the towns the faction and main quests bring you to, but doing that alone can get you all the quests in the game.
I played nearly a hundred hours waiting for it to get better, all it did was convince me that previous games were flukes made fun by mods. Starfield doesn't even have the mods to make it fun and might never have them.
The thumbnail got me. I can't believe that was actually a real response from a supposedly professional "customer service" rep at Bethesda. That's like a response you'd get from someone who calls you from a scam center and then you call them out on the scam.
Wait it's actually real???? Holy shit I thought it was photoshopped 😂
@@smurfdaddy420they're always photoshop.
Customer support has the most copy paste replies ever.
"Age of the creation engine is starting to show." Bro it was old back when Skyrim came out.
Its not just Bethesda that does this. Nearly every studio/company in the entertainment industry punches down on their audience, especially when a segment of the audience does go along with their narrative.
"punches down" I fucking hate this language
Bungie is a prime example of this
The Witcher on Netflix also a prime example.
Love the fact his neighbours play the drums once a month for 30 minutes and then stop, that has to be some kind of ritual.. Trying to summon the hermit out of his house.
In Skyrim 2011 there were loading screens, to enter cities, houses, etc., and you know? Someone released a mod, open cities, that eliminated them, the mod was not perfect but then some more came out. Twelve years later Starfield comes out with the same or more loading screens...
From a game developer standpoint it is significantly better to have many loading screens that take 7 seconds than have a huge, fully open world that loads for 7 minutes when you start the game
@@kevinmalisek9353but… there are huge open worlds with no load screens whatsoever that load up in 7 seconds… it is literally just Bethesda that can’t implement this
@@kevinmalisek9353 Those aren't the only two options. Most modern open world games don't have nearly as many loading screens, nor do they take 7 mins to load.
@@kevinmalisek9353 Dented head thoughts.
Ya and unfortunately a mod of the same nature wouldn’t even fix this game lol 😅
Starfield is the only game in my 40 years of gaming that I ACTUALLY hate. I will not be purchasing The Elder Scrolls VI because of it, or any other game released by Bethesda or has Todd associated with it, like Indiana Jones...
Pretty strange to hear YongYea point out the negative response of Bugthesda while doing that exact Diva thing when players recently called out his poor voice acting & portrayal of Kiryu.
42:15 I loved Skyrim primarily for its setting, the evocative and beautiful landscapes and architecture and the music, and I also found the skill and talent trees captivating (for a time). I didn't find the combat, dialogue, story or voice acting great, but it was okay enough. As an RPG main I'm used to a little bit of clunk in favor of RPG mechanics. What kept me in the game a lot longer than it by itself would have been able to was the modding scene, though. But what killed all of my investment was when they brought out the Legendary Edition (or whatever it was called), which invalidated a majority of mods. I never made the effort of updating or replacing the 100+ mods that were no longer functional, it sucked.
But yeah, to this day I feel a deep connection with Skyrim through its music and landscape pictures / recordings, I think that is the main thing. I also think back to some memories of interesting locations and points of interest I discovered as I roamed around the lovingly crafted world. The feeling of exploration was another great achievement of the game.
Skyrim was already a worse game than Oblivion, which was worse than Morrowind. I am quite old and have always been into RPG's since pixel vomit games of the early 90's, and I didn't even bother to get Starfield, it was obvious how shite it was gonna be, you watch the curve and you predict.
@@guypierson5754 Skyrim wasn't worse than Oblivion. Oblivion had broken NPC's and leveling. In skyrim you can level to max level with no problem.
Skyrim's landscapes and atmosphere are well done but architecture? None of the woodwork ever made sense there
@@niccolobrioschi3758 I'm not necessarily talking about intricate details of individual buildings, but more on a larger scale. Google Skyrim Solitude or Markarth for example. When I mentioned architecture in my comment I was primarily thinking of buildings and towns like these with (at least conceptually) interesting layouts and designs, and also the way they fit into the landscape and are evoking a sense of awe and scale.
@@holysecret2 fair enough. Starfield is not bad however, at least relatively... Bethesda has always made problematic games if you think about it. I loved Oblivion but it had a completely broken leveling system that made leveling up optional AND counterproductive f.e. and many preferred to complete the game at level 1. I think very young people don't know or remember
Coming from Oblivion, Skyrim, ESO and Fallout 4, Bethesda seem to really struggle when it comes to making a compelling main or overarching storyline. Which I find very strange, because I tend to find their side quests very enjoyable. This problem tends to only become worse when Bethesda forces players to go through the main storyline due to content or game features being locked behind it.
Yeah, I always thought the best questlines in Skyrim were not the main quest. The College of Winterhold, Thieves Guild, Dark Brotherhood, and the Companions really stole the show.
Morrowind story was great, tho the original lore guy left afterwards which is also why we got basic ass medieval Europe cyrodil and Viking Skyrim instead of what they really were in the original lore
yeah fallout 4 main quest was absolute garbage
@@DeepTissueExplorer Oh yeah New Vegas is where it's at.
The engine alone is certainly enough to make it bad because I didn't even make it 2 hours in, so I didn't even get a chance to get turned off by the story. Literally in the opening scene they have people in a mine lasering the walls but there are no damage effects to the wall whatsoever. And I don't mean they didn't have destructible walls, there's no bump mapping or even textures to show the mining lasers do anything. Goldeneye for the N64 had better wall damage effects. Then you have the same janky AI we've been seeing for 22 years now, and loading screens, physics, inventory management. It's unacceptable. I didn't even like Skyrim that much because I was such a huge Oblivion fan I'd already seen it all before, just like Morrowind fans didn't think Oblivion was that impressive. It's the same Bethesda BS that's been going on forever, but it just isn't acceptable in 2023, not with the other games it has to compete with. Even if Star citizen is a bit janky, the stuff they have done with it is absolutely insane, literally flying from any part on one planet to any part of another, server meshing, and gameplay physics being the same throughout every aspect of the game. You can also leave a hotdog on one planet and a day later another player can fly down to the same spot you left it and eat it. And for FPS and action it is a sh!tstain on the boot of Cyberpunk's gameplay. For people calling it mid I don't know what crappy games you are playing that are worse. I haven't played a game as bad as Starfield in years.
I've played with modded infinite carry weight and the reason why it is so restricted is, that the game literally freezes when you switch weapons if you have more than 1000 kg of loot.
Ya damn loot goblin. 😂
The game feels like an A.I. made it.
I think what hurt this game the most is the fact that Baldur's Gate 3 and Elden Ring exist. They reminded people good games can exist
These two have so greatly elevated the standards of what roleplaying and open-world games could be. It doesn't help that Starfield came out so close to BG3, meaning it was still really fresh in the collective minds of the internet.
The two Zelda games, current no man's sky
No Mans Sky especially. I played that game and it has way more exploration than Starfield and that's what I was looking for. The combat is not amazing but I like flying around, gathering resources and exploring wherever I wanna go and that's what that game has
Fallout New Vegas already did that. It's just that Bethesda gained an incredible number of casual fanboys thanks to the hype of Skyrim and Fallout 4 that does not know what a good non-linear, well-written RPG looks like. BG3 came out and brought it to the next level and reminded people of what a RPG should be like.
@@saint8257 new Vegas was *good* not great.
@@gargleff2691 coming from the guy who said the 2 Zelda games, L take.
I disagree that load screens aren't important. They are the core game mechanic that breaks all immersiveness, and obviously it can't be fixed by mods. I don't say that without the issue the game would be a good, because it's not, but it's really one of the biggest problems. Second one is the absence of space in a space game, you just not feel that you're flying, you're just jumping with load screens from one scene to another. Personally I would disabled fast travel at all with condition that those two problems were non existed.
This would not fix the game entirely but it would have at least some perspective that someday will be released some great mods that fixes other problems. Because without that the game is dead, I really don't believe that it can be fixed with any patches or mods.
The retrospective videos on this game made ten years from now are gonna be wild
Patrician ahead of the curve on this one lol
They’re either going to hail it as the biggest turnaround since no man’s sky, or it’ll be dissected forever on how not to make a video game.
There’s SO MUCH SHIT in this game. And I mean shit, annoying fluff, like 100 different drugs that I barely know what they do, a bazillion things for building outposts which is fucking annoying to clutter shit up, and a dumbass decision to restrict the loot you can store and WHY ARE VENDORS SO FUCKING POOR
@@aquagrunty101 not to pat myself on the back, but I saw it all a mile away. Plenty of my friends and coworkers were fuckin soyjack pogging about every little detail that was revealed and my cynical ass was suspicious the whole time. Turned out I was right. But I'm only like that because I've been burned a couple of times by the hype train already. The only way I ever want to experience this game is through the inevitable five hour long Joseph Anderson video.
Everyone who played Skyrim knew how bad Bethesda is at gaming. FO4, 76 just continued mediocrity
@JoshuaKevinPerry Ya, you're right. Oblivion was the Superior game anyway
33:10 Making instant fast travel anywhere makes the game world feel small. The EXACT opposite of what they had intended apparently .. holy crap.
The cake analogy is great, but you don't even need to throw in strange ingredients. Bethesda had all the same tools as anyone else, they screwed up their measurements, they used a recipe that never worked well and relied on those about to eat it to slather enough frosting to fix the taste, and this time they also burnt it. When you have a burnt cake, you can't fix it with frosting(mods). You throw it out and start over from scratch.
I thought it was so cool to see a ronin class with the possibility (I thought) to be a space Ninja. There is like only one samurai sword in the entire game and stealth (in my opinion) is garbage. I constantly failed to stay undetected even without companions. This just made me not want to play another class because they couldn't get this one right. But who knows. Maybe I misunderstood the ronin class or had too high of hopes?
Todd knows, and he says you played his game wrong and need to put in another 100 hours with a new character to make the game feel completely different, that's when it gets good trust me.
You may have had high hopes and flown too close to the sun, but Bethesda was the one who told you how high to fly, and they designed the wings.
Funny. There are actually two swords. And a few other melee weapons in the game. And you might be doing it wrong as I play a stealth melee build with a lot of success. Now, if Bethesda were to implement things that people here complain about, that build and quite a lot of related skills would become pointless. Do we really want that in BGS games?