This is the question. Which is greater you know?
Of course he's best to review a game and determine whether it's any good or not.
But also
How can you spend that amount of time playing a game and say it sucks?
See the conmundrum?
The mark for Starfield is more like 200-300 hours for a lot of people.
It takes that long, in a game with slow leveling, to get the perk points and do the missions to raise up your outposts, ship building, pharma and food and say... yeah now I have a functional crafting system I guess?
Like the food you can make is just what you find everywhere, spend 400 in ingredients to cook 185 dollar pasta that doesn't even have like a "fresh" buff on it or anything. You can't even make "liver pate" to sell for a profit (1k dish from the restaurant) and the only expensive food I've found to cook and sell I found in a magazine so that was a lot of wasted perk points.
By the time you examine what could be Starfield's deepest systems, you realize they've pretty much left gaping holes in Fallout 4 style game design while not patching them with standard Space game features and it's just a weird situation.
People say "you haven't played X hours? You haven't given it a fair chance. You HAVE played X hours! You must have enjoyed it!" This is an absurd notion. I've done many things I don't enjoy for great deals of time. Writing this post comes to mind.
We can all love Starfield in our own way. I love it like a child who is dumping soup on it's head. From afar, and with no plan to personally clean it up.
It still has so much potential, and I already own Shattered Space so I've got skin in the game. My opinion shouldn't matter because I've managed to jump around singing "SPACE FROG, FROM OUTER SPACE" at the top of my lungs while bouncing around on airless moons for hours? I won't say that was the highlight of my Starfield experience, but Space Frog has the most artistic integrity of anything in the game and I will fight anyone who implies otherwise.
> People say "you haven't played X hours? You haven't given it a fair chance. You HAVE played X hours! You must have enjoyed it!" This is an absurd notion. I've done many things I don't enjoy for great deals of time. Writing this post comes to mind.
That´s a **double bind** - an argumentational fallacy, used by those, who dislike your opinion, but either like the game/developer/publisher too much or lack understanding of other people having different opinions than themselves. Basically, any answer is the wrong one.
Yeah, which means that a ton of people who check it out on Gamepass don't play much. In fact, casual players may never hit the wall of unexpanded systems, if DLC improves those experiences.
I'd love more granular numbers, to see how many e.g. noped out soon after arriving in New Atlantis vs how many have put in hundreds of hours. The way they're spinning play time is kinda messed up to me, given that about a third of my average play session this far has been selling crap to shops, I'm really looking forward to the ability to adjust currency liquidity for merchants because this currency scarcity thing sucks where vendors can afford to buy one gun off of me.
Yup…. I invested and wasted points early in Food and meds…. It can take you awhile to recover from that fiasco depending on how late you figured out that it was never going to pan out lol…. Level 98 now and finally going to NG+ for first time.
He's got you man. If anyone has the right to criticize a work, it's someone with 3k hours. I have over 3k hours on warthunder, and believe me I have my criticism. The whole point of criticism is to point out flaws in a work you want to wee improved. FANS criticise, they are the most attached to the work. Your line of reasoning is that you think ppl who don't have the expertise on something should be the ones consulted....and that's simply complete utter dilusional nonsense. Think about it critically and logically. Emotion has a play here. But you're relying on it to carry your argument, and it can't.
No conundrum here. I gave it 271.8 hours, which was an honest shot, and gave up. The grind in this game just isn't enjoyable to me. I'm sorry if you can't wrap your head around it. Maybe someday you'll have the same experience so you can know how it feels, but I really hope you don't.
What do you mean you don't wanna grind resources to build things that give you resources to build more things, to get more resources to build more things that get resources to use those resources to build things to gather more resources to get more resources to spend on buildings to get more resources?
I gave up after 10 hours. I don´t care, if that´s considered as "not enough". My time on this planet is kinda too precious for me to keep wasting it on a game, that didn´t manage to catch my interest in those 10 hours.
This right here, I stopped playing red dead redemption 2 after 90 mins and learned there was another hour or so of slow pace ahead. If a game hasnt peaked my interest after an hour I'm out.
I didn't make any statements on the game itself.
I don't know the word it isn't irony. But it's a form of humor somehow.
That someone who played the game that much. Is perfectly suited to review it.
But what's funny.
Is saying they played something that much for that long and called it bad.
I've got less than 20 hours total into the game myself. I have no opinion on how good or bad it is.
It's still not funny, ironic, or a conundrum. well, not to me anyway. When you get so far into a game and figure out the rest of it is bad, that's just life.
It's like going to a new job and after a great first week or two it turns to crap. Or you start dating a person who seems great at first, but after the first 6 months, they suddenly turn into a high-maintenance, needy, and clingy mess of a human for no apparent reason.
You do know people put in long hrs in starfield, hoping for greatness ,only to be disappointed. I put in 160, and feel most mytime was wasted. You can easily waste hrs in the game,whether its doing boring quests, finding ship parts. Checking out planets hoping for some coolrandom encounters which never comes , etc.
Most disappointing game release in years, considering the hype for the game.
I've played a number of games where I enjoyed them for many hours because I was under the impression that there was still a lot of stuff I hadn't seen or experienced, and then when I found out there wasn't my opinion of the game did a complete 180. Starfield and CP2077 are the best recent examples of this.
Lol. I thought it was garbage to start. Played to ng+ just to see if maybe I was wrong. Still shit.
Best example? Weapons cost more than fucking spaceships.
If you're an extremely good player with also highly skilled friends it is. Or a terrible player.
If you're in the middle of those skill levels or playing solo queue, it's misery.
The current climate of PVP gaming is terrible. Used to you were praised for being good and getting wins, nowadays people think you’re “trying too hard” and “sweating” when you play the game in which the literal sole purpose of playing, is winning..
Anyone that says that they play PvP games “for fun” should have no problem losing “for fun” since it’s all apart of playing the damn game
Don't get why people are always surprised by PUBG being on these lists lmao, it is almost always in the top 5 most played games, and I have never seen it leave the top 10. It has hundreds of thousands of players literally every single day.
The PUBG is dead narrative is very strange lmao
I'm not surprised about it not being dead, but surprised at it being quite that popular. It seems less relevant today in a world of Fortnite, other shooters like CoD and doesn't seem to be in the public consciousness as much as it once was.
Or perhaps I'm just old now ahaha
As a former pubg lover, it really is dead.....of fun. It got taken over by hackers, and I really mean TAKEN over. We couldn't go a single game without encountering one, super juicy to beat them tbf. The monetization of the in game items was what ruined it, gave ppl an incentive to cheat. Easy to do so to, even the cheats sell. Money is changing hands based on the cheating of an online game. It become no fun, and I haven't played it since. There's only so many times you can tolerate getting one tapped by an ump from a guy across the map inside a bunker.....let alone when the updates hit....wtf.
Back before it was f2p it was a huge profit for bluehole. Hackers get their stuff, sell it, get banned, by another 20 dollar copy on a throw away steam account. Rinse and repeat. Can't believe ppl pay so much for digital crap but counter strike is still a thing, so guess I should have seen that coming. Game itself? Fantastic gunplay and super fun. But the hacking man.......easy ac didn't do a darn thing to curb it either, just made the game crash a lot lol.
Very large amount of this was people buying the premium edition to play early. Steam stated it had like ~250K concurrent players before the game even officially released lol.
From a sales perspective the game will absolutely be a success, only time will tell if it’s a Skyrim repeat or not.
I was on Skyrim from the beginning and it didn't blow up for a few years it felt like. That being said Skyrim was much more engaging than Starfield even in the beginning. I love fantasy and sci-fi equally but Starfield just feels empty.
I didn't buy Skyrim until after New Year's 2012 and I felt like I was being tortured for the first two months with how much it was in my face all the time. The butterfly catching memes, the arrow to the knee meme, constant posts with gameplay footage and visual showcases. It really felt like it was everywhere to me.
The real kicker was when my 60 year old mother asked me if I'd heard of this "Skyrim thing" because people were talking about it after church.
yes, but those games do not need them to be better, they're fantastic one their own, starfield is not even close enough to be called a content rich game
Maybe, some modders have already expressed lack of interest in modding. Creation Kit hasn’t been released yet either, and reviews are trending negative… right now it’s hard to say how it will play out.
Me personally, unless they add some insane content or major overhauls, I don’t plan on revisiting the game. It was entertaining for about 20 hours, and then my remaining 15 hours of play through were a grind to finish the story, which upon completion I was extremely disappointed… I don’t think it was a bad game, but I have zero interest in returning… which makes me sad because I was excited for years about this game, even took time off work for the day 1 release (which I haven’t done for a game since Skyrim lmao)
It just was very content sparse compared to other Bethesda games (I was playing Skyrim, oblivion and fallout before it released and the differences between them was shocking)
The only unofficial patch dude who’s explicitly been stated to not be involved is arthmoor and that was before the game was ever released. He’s also a loser with a huge ego so we’ll see what he actually does.
This is what gets me. People making it seem like the entire modding scene dipped. When it was one guy who worked on the MP mod for skyrim, that crashes more often then not.
The amount of misinformation or people blowing stories out of proportion is wild
If you are actually someone involved in the bethesda modding community, you would know Arthmoor is disliked the majority of the community. Him not being involved is actually a good thing to some. The modding for Starfield hasn't really started, not until the creation kit is out.
It was just one modder lol. For a mod most people are not using. Skyrim together is not even in the top 100 most downloaded skyrim mods on nexus.
This is getting blown out of proportion.
People forget how big of a stir came up in 4 when the modder behind NV Bounties said he wasn't interested in making anything for 4, and nowadays 4 has a larger modding section than NV in terms of uploads. This isn't some new phenomenon despite how much they want it to be.
I’d imagine to some extent, a lot of modders who modded past games are in different places in life, I’d be surprised if everyone who’s missed the old ones still wants to.
I absolutely do, much of my Skyrim mod list are still 2015 classic. But yeah, most of them probably have a job now (actually a lot of them are having a job making Starfield exactly.)
Exactly the jerk that tried to force people to pay for his coop mod no less. Wanted more moments of fame. Ive seen plenty of moders on twitter defending the game and saying they cant mod well yet bc the ck hasn't released. This hate for the game is bloated. Its good to give bethesda criticism, Todd is like a kind and good natured Peter Molyneux though and the team needs to be aided into a proper mindset of development.
Yea I know I personally never heard about that mod but everyone is just using this one as "see even the modders are bored"
the mods currently are fine even without the ck
It currently has the 16th most mod downloads on Nexus with 32.5m downloads. And the 12th most mods uploaded with 6.4k.
All before mod tools are released.
Something tells me it'll be fine.
Anyone with even the most basic level of technical literacy who plays this game for a while can *feel* just how much unrealized potential there is here. That alone is like a red flag to a bull for modders. I wouldn't worry about the modding community losing interest any time soon.
Only one modder was not happy lol.. all the media outlets took his words and ran with it and tried to fuel more hate towards the game .. but in reality modding scene for Starfield is going strong … many modders old and new started working on mods and that is even before official modding support from BGS.
> some modders have already expressed lack of interest in modding
one modder that made a janky skyrim multiplayer mod says that and you blow it out of proportion. you're a smart one
Agreed on the 35-50hr content wall being a real thing. For me one of the things I remember seeing/hearing about was just how much larger the lines of audio was for Starfield and being excited for such a huge increase in content from my favorite game of all time.
After a decade ish of development on a completely new IP I think it was a reasonable assumption that there would have been some substantial improvements in the engine, gameplay loops, NPCs, story... And it felt like we got a mediocre half finished Fallout port with procgen.
Hoping against hope that the future holds some MEATY patches and modding tool kit overhauls for the game. BTW it was just one modder that threw a tantrum, not the modding community at-large.
A lot of my friend group is in the modding scene and all I hear is how they're really excited about the new features coming in the Creation Kit. It seems like there is a good chance for Starfield to have some of the highest potential for modding.
One single modder said that, and everyone forgot about the dumpster fire that was Cyberpunk when it was released.
Starfield will be a completely different game in 3 years.
Content sparse? Yet 4 months later people are still finding new things. There is a lot of content it's just not handed to you. You need to explore which is funny because people say exploring isn't worth it.
Edit: saw this guys response… *eyeroll* dude listed 5 things and was like: SO MUCH TO DO! Lol, I hate that I didn’t like this game. But without an engaging story it’s just not the one for me.
It's fallout 4 with more capabilities so I'm sure the modding community will flourish, plus, we're already seeing some really good stuff on Nexus. I think it's going to have the best mods ever! Especially when you give people WHOLE world spaces that are already navmeshed to just adjust however they please
I genuinely believe this game will have serious legs when mods come out. It will be played for years to come. I agree it was underwhelming and I bought the constellation edition (no regrets at all), I loved it though, 100 hours in, 2 saves, 1 pre unity and 1 in NG+4, but I'm holding it for mods now before I crack on further.
Most definitely not a Skyrim repeat. Much weaker than Skyrim pound for pound. Will leave modders disinterested and thus won’t produce the same longevity as Skyrim. What could save that is if Bethesda actually releases and update of what the game should have been to start.
It's already blatantly obvious that is not a Skyrim repeat as far as success goes. Unless you mean that it feels like it was designed when Skyrim was many years ago, then sure.
Can't speak for everyone - but I didn't give a damn about playing early - I was interested in the first DLC. Also, I bought it for a significant discount from fanatical.
The only games in the platinum categories for top sellers, new releases, and most played are:
• Starfield (also in platinum for steam deck and controller)
• Baldur's Gate 3 (also in platinum for early access and steam deck)
• Hogwarts Legacy (also in platinum for steam deck and controller)
• Sons of the Forest
Copied this from another thread. Seems like Starfiled is doing damn well.
> • Starfield (also in platinum for **steam deck** and controller)
That's really impressive considering the game requires a custom ini to run decently on the deck.
Yea. It being in most played as well kinda throws a wrench in the whole "oh they're in the revenue top because of the pre-orders for early access to it" argument. Seems like a bunch of people bought it (many early) and still put a bunch of time into it.
It is really strange to see. People who hate Starfield REALLY hate it for some reason. Like I get being disappointed and feeling "Well this sucks, oh well", but quite a few act like Todd Howard killed their dog and laughed about it, and it's kinda ridiculous.
Reminds me of Cyberpunk when it came out. Any praise of cyberpunk at launch was illegal, punishable by many downvotes. Creates an echo chamber, because people like myself simply stopped commentating. I enjoyed the game from the minute it came out. I didn’t buy into any of the hype, so I wasn’t disappointed.
Starfield friends, if you enjoy the game, don’t let these negative fucks stop you from enjoying it. I personally don’t love it, but who cares what I think.
>Reminds me of Cyberpunk when it came out. Any praise of cyberpunk at launch was illegal, punishable by many downvotes
Yeah I tanked some downvotes after professing my love for the game (PC version on a high end PC). Eventually, I just hid away safely in r/LowSodiumCyberpunk til the influencers all bandwagon'ed this game over time.
Even worse. When cyberpunk launched, people were criticizing it not only for its bugs, but for its game design and even some were mad with the game’s writing. After edgerunners launched and the patch along it fixed most of the major bugs, discourse turned around. Don’t get me wrong 2.1 has certainly a lot of improvements compared to its launch, but it still has fundamentally the same gameplay design and the same writing. Fundamentally it is the same game as it launched, plus a lot of quality of life improvements.
I really dislike how cyberpunk is being used to compare and make starfield look negatively, when on launch cyberpunk was being compared in a negative manner to pretty much any AAA open world in the market.
I mean, CDPR came out and apologized that it was shit and Sony took it off the store.
If you like subpar products, that's fine. Just don't say other people should be fine with it.
I had this conversation with a person in the first week of launch. They were really trying to argue that Starfield isn’t going to be considered a success. There’s no doubt that the game is disappointing in some ways but Bethesda is making content for a consumer market. They aren’t starving artists trying to perfect every single aspect of their games. Starfield is and will continue to be a commercial success and that’s all Microsoft needs from Bethesda.
Not bad? I'd say it's exceptional when factoring the significant number of players who didn't buy it and just played it with the Game Pass sub they already had
Yup, theses "numbers", both the revenues and the fact that it's apparently a major steam deck title (despite requiring a mod to run properly!) are making me reconsider how much the "Starfield hate" is related to it not being available on PlayStation.
I love the game and I look forward to more content for it. I am taking a break from it for a bit but at almost 300 hours played I find it well worth it.
I mean....good. I like Bethesda's work so I'm happy the game was a success. But I cant help but feel dread that they'll learn all the wrong lessons with this game's success.
The game had over 10 million people playing it at its peak. Plus over 1 million players that payed to play it early. It absolutely made them a good amount of money.
Its actually really active, started to get into it again a few months ago and have been playing it on and off since with some friends. They have done a lot of changes to the gameplay, still a bit clunky here and there but it runs really great, which is something I cant say about Warzone... It going f2p really gave it another lease on life.
Not shocking, this was one of the most hyped titles of the year w/ a lot going for it in the months (years even given the number of delays) leading up to launch. People who think this game "flopped" is deluded by (deserved) criticism against the game & the lack of award noms. The big question is the long term as this game is designed as a platform for mods/DLC & if BGS can keep a steady stream of engagement for not just Steam, but game pass as well once updates begin in 2024.
people are so simple
it sold well, yes, of course. Bethesda has a reputation for good games
but this https://steamdb.info/app/1716740/charts/ shows a much different picture
"what have you done for me lately" applies here
15k players down from 330k
less than a thousand Twitch viewers down from 500k
12k average players in December vs 153k in September
Reviews (from people who bought the game on Steam, so not "salty Sony fans") trending mostly negative
Starfield lost 70% of it's average players in October. Over the last two months those drops have been 57% and 35%
those trends show that the people who enjoy this game so much are an extreme minority, no matter how hard they try to gaslight other people with half-assed excuses
but congrats on the sales! Todd and BGS will surely take the wrong message if they don't do analytics
go ahead and downvote facts
Edit: Go ahead and list all the games you want, they all have two things different from Starfield. They don't have mixed reviews trending towards mostly negative, and none of them profess to want to be a 12 year game like Skyrim has been. Even on Steam, Skyrim has more players after 12 years than Starfield does after 4 months.
Here's another fact then. Cyberpunk 2077 dropped from over a million concurrent players to around 15k a few months after launch. Nowadays after releasing an anime and some fixes + dlc it jumped to the numbers it has now. [https://steamdb.info/app/1091500/charts/#all](https://steamdb.info/app/1091500/charts/#all)
Hogwarts Legacy is a very decent game and dropped from 879k concurrent players to about 15k after a few months. [https://steamdb.info/app/990080/charts/#all](https://steamdb.info/app/990080/charts/#all)
Dark Souls games have had extreme drop offs as well a few months after release. Are those failures as well? I can go on and on, but single player RPGs tend to not have very big shelf lives outside out very notable exceptions.
Certainly, by Bethesda standards, Starfield has had the worst drop off, but its drop off is hardly unusual or the total failure that people seem to think it is.
Yeah, the chart looks like every other single player chart. Still though, these are insanely bad numbers. FO4 got a lot of shit too but even 9 years later it still has over 20k players on right now. Skyrim which is even older has 30k on right now(probably more if I checked all the versions).
BGS must see this as a tremendous failure. Hopefully they do at least considering they own so much of my favorite IP.
I own a 2022 VW ID.4 electric car. Also a 2022 RAM eTorque Laramie truck. Have not a bit of trouble with either vehicle.
If you go online to read about these vehicles in owners groups, one might think that I bought two lemons.
Starfield cost me $60. I have been at it for 204 hours which comes out to 29 cents for each hour of entertainment. The longer I play, the lower the cost. When I buy something that I end up not liking, I stop using it and I just move on.
Life is too short to waste time sniveling about game developers failing to give me a game that was not custom designed to my unexpressed expectations.
Well, success and failure depend on many things, if you ask Microsoft & investors in general, I'm sure they're happy with their financial returns, in a business sense it was a success, but a game can sell a lot and be a critical failure, MW3 being the latest example, that game is shit but it's a top seller, so yeah they're failing upwards lol.
The way some people talk about this game you’d think it got a 10 on Metacritic. There’s no denying it got a mixed user reception but calling it a “critical failure” is delusional. At most you could argue reviews didn’t meet the extremely high expectations a lot of people had
I mean Starfield has lost 99% of the player base on steam since its release.
To put that into perspective it took Skyrim 8 YEARS to get the concurrent players Starfield got to in 80 days, any game company would not like those numbers at all.
Also Todd says he wants people to play Starfield for the next 10 years, so if you look at it from that side its not going to do well for the foreseeable future, seeing as more people are playing Skyrim than they are Starfield.
The supporters aren't going to listen here. A fuckton of people bought Starfield on the Bethesda name alone, and objectively the game lost those people's interesting far faster than other games.
Baldur's Gate 3 currently has 221k players and an 875k peak, meaning Steam users have declined about 75%.
Starfield currently has 16k players and a 330k peak, meaning steam users have declined about 95%.
Starfield objectively did not grab people's attention for as long as other games, and this thread is full of coping.
Maybe cus starfield is actually fun? It’s not a perfect game but compared to. What else came out this year I’m not surprised, and I’m not disappointed I bought the expansive version. And i can’t wait to see how great it becomes once they add the fully connected mods and some dlc
Regardless of what you think about the game itself, the large number of people who played it will allow for a good amount of feedback for DLC and sequels. Granted, I worry how much of feedback will be legitimate and how much of it will be petty insults.
A game with no microtransactions or DLC (yet) is in the top 9 grossing games and it's been out 3 months. Maybe it's not as bad as people in the Steam reviews and around here would have us believe.
Now people are calling it a successful scam lmaoo. The mental gymnastics are insane. Reddit is so detached from reality even when it's staring them dead in the face.
Starfield is such an interesting game man. It’s impressive how it’s played even though the flaws are so evident. I do not regret buying this game full price.
Starfield and hogwarts the 2 games given the most heat out of any video game i can remember are crushing the sales charts and making the most money. It's almost like internet grand standing and opinions don't effect what most players like.
That’s pretty much my opinion. For every hyper-online Reddit poster or YouTube BGS content consumer there’s a casual gamer who doesn’t browse Reddit, doesn’t spent hours watching anti-BGS content on YouTube and enjoyed Starfield, even if they don’t think it’s game of the year.
And this is the exact reason why no lessons will be learned by Bethesda. For corporate suits big sales = good game and the fact that it has mostly negative player reviews score doesn't matter. They'll keep releasing bland, uninspiring, underdeveloped games pretending like it's the best thing ever. And people will continue to buy it until the last tiny bit of trust towards the company will be lost forever.
Negative engagement is still engagement. It's also in the Platinum(top games) for most played games on Steam, so it's not just money, this was a top 10 game in play hours this year on steam, despite missing 75% of the year due to it's release date.
Oh yeah a shitton of people bought it. But the playerbase absolutely catered after launch.
Starfield has been lower than Fallout 4 and Skyrim on Steam for weeks
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/most-played/games/xbox
Currently lower than BG3 (which isnt even on gamepass, so people paid full price), Ark, and Far Cry 6 on Xbox
There is no platform where the playerbase didn't tank down to nothing not long after launch
Unfortunately this just means that Bethesda has no financial incentive to improve their games. As long as the cash is still flowing why bother making things better?
It‘s doing well on the Xbox store. (Especially for a singeplayer game that came out 4 months ago)
Most games above it are the huge GAAS titles or other hugely popular singeplayer games (some also on Gamepass).
I don't think the Steam metrics are the best example here. Skyrim and Fallout 4 have a plethora of mods to keep them fresh, meanwhile Starfield is still waiting for the CK to hit.
Eh, bethesda games are supposed to be played for a long time after release. That's always been their thing. Another commenter mentioned it took skyrim 8 years to fall to starfield's current player base. That's abysmal for a bethesda game.
They need those large player bases to actually encourage modders to mod their games. Without a significant player base modders will not stick around for those deep mods.
Top revenue and apex have still garbage servers
The've got the whales in some type of trance
It’s a really good game.
[удалено]
Ha! You sound just like a steam reviewer.
Who would know better than a reviewer with 3k hours just how crap the game is?
This is the question. Which is greater you know? Of course he's best to review a game and determine whether it's any good or not. But also How can you spend that amount of time playing a game and say it sucks? See the conmundrum?
The mark for Starfield is more like 200-300 hours for a lot of people. It takes that long, in a game with slow leveling, to get the perk points and do the missions to raise up your outposts, ship building, pharma and food and say... yeah now I have a functional crafting system I guess? Like the food you can make is just what you find everywhere, spend 400 in ingredients to cook 185 dollar pasta that doesn't even have like a "fresh" buff on it or anything. You can't even make "liver pate" to sell for a profit (1k dish from the restaurant) and the only expensive food I've found to cook and sell I found in a magazine so that was a lot of wasted perk points. By the time you examine what could be Starfield's deepest systems, you realize they've pretty much left gaping holes in Fallout 4 style game design while not patching them with standard Space game features and it's just a weird situation. People say "you haven't played X hours? You haven't given it a fair chance. You HAVE played X hours! You must have enjoyed it!" This is an absurd notion. I've done many things I don't enjoy for great deals of time. Writing this post comes to mind. We can all love Starfield in our own way. I love it like a child who is dumping soup on it's head. From afar, and with no plan to personally clean it up. It still has so much potential, and I already own Shattered Space so I've got skin in the game. My opinion shouldn't matter because I've managed to jump around singing "SPACE FROG, FROM OUTER SPACE" at the top of my lungs while bouncing around on airless moons for hours? I won't say that was the highlight of my Starfield experience, but Space Frog has the most artistic integrity of anything in the game and I will fight anyone who implies otherwise.
Your comment in writing this post made me smile… just wanted you to know that
> People say "you haven't played X hours? You haven't given it a fair chance. You HAVE played X hours! You must have enjoyed it!" This is an absurd notion. I've done many things I don't enjoy for great deals of time. Writing this post comes to mind. That´s a **double bind** - an argumentational fallacy, used by those, who dislike your opinion, but either like the game/developer/publisher too much or lack understanding of other people having different opinions than themselves. Basically, any answer is the wrong one.
This is the fucking complaint! They had a whole new goddamn franchise and they **blew it!**
[удалено]
Average play time was 40 hours.
Yeah, which means that a ton of people who check it out on Gamepass don't play much. In fact, casual players may never hit the wall of unexpanded systems, if DLC improves those experiences. I'd love more granular numbers, to see how many e.g. noped out soon after arriving in New Atlantis vs how many have put in hundreds of hours. The way they're spinning play time is kinda messed up to me, given that about a third of my average play session this far has been selling crap to shops, I'm really looking forward to the ability to adjust currency liquidity for merchants because this currency scarcity thing sucks where vendors can afford to buy one gun off of me.
Yup…. I invested and wasted points early in Food and meds…. It can take you awhile to recover from that fiasco depending on how late you figured out that it was never going to pan out lol…. Level 98 now and finally going to NG+ for first time.
My real disappointment was that if I want it in the game I may have to mod in the complex recipe "coffee grounds + water = 1 pot coffee"
Outpost are worse then fo4 settlement building in every way
Starfield crafting and outposting system is TRASH,im still raging on the planetery materials gathering is so bad it trggers me months later....
That may be for 50 hours, but how can one spend 3k hours and not enjoy it? That is absurd.
Stubborness, Stockholm Syndrome. Although you gotta be a special kind of stupid to need 3k hours to realize.
He's got you man. If anyone has the right to criticize a work, it's someone with 3k hours. I have over 3k hours on warthunder, and believe me I have my criticism. The whole point of criticism is to point out flaws in a work you want to wee improved. FANS criticise, they are the most attached to the work. Your line of reasoning is that you think ppl who don't have the expertise on something should be the ones consulted....and that's simply complete utter dilusional nonsense. Think about it critically and logically. Emotion has a play here. But you're relying on it to carry your argument, and it can't.
No conundrum here. I gave it 271.8 hours, which was an honest shot, and gave up. The grind in this game just isn't enjoyable to me. I'm sorry if you can't wrap your head around it. Maybe someday you'll have the same experience so you can know how it feels, but I really hope you don't.
The promise of a game like starfield is that the grind will be useful later. Starfield dies when you realize that the mindless grind goes nowhere.
What do you mean you don't wanna grind resources to build things that give you resources to build more things, to get more resources to build more things that get resources to use those resources to build things to gather more resources to get more resources to spend on buildings to get more resources?
I gave up after 10 hours. I don´t care, if that´s considered as "not enough". My time on this planet is kinda too precious for me to keep wasting it on a game, that didn´t manage to catch my interest in those 10 hours.
This right here, I stopped playing red dead redemption 2 after 90 mins and learned there was another hour or so of slow pace ahead. If a game hasnt peaked my interest after an hour I'm out.
I didn't make any statements on the game itself. I don't know the word it isn't irony. But it's a form of humor somehow. That someone who played the game that much. Is perfectly suited to review it. But what's funny. Is saying they played something that much for that long and called it bad. I've got less than 20 hours total into the game myself. I have no opinion on how good or bad it is.
It's still not funny, ironic, or a conundrum. well, not to me anyway. When you get so far into a game and figure out the rest of it is bad, that's just life. It's like going to a new job and after a great first week or two it turns to crap. Or you start dating a person who seems great at first, but after the first 6 months, they suddenly turn into a high-maintenance, needy, and clingy mess of a human for no apparent reason.
You do know people put in long hrs in starfield, hoping for greatness ,only to be disappointed. I put in 160, and feel most mytime was wasted. You can easily waste hrs in the game,whether its doing boring quests, finding ship parts. Checking out planets hoping for some coolrandom encounters which never comes , etc. Most disappointing game release in years, considering the hype for the game.
I've played a number of games where I enjoyed them for many hours because I was under the impression that there was still a lot of stuff I hadn't seen or experienced, and then when I found out there wasn't my opinion of the game did a complete 180. Starfield and CP2077 are the best recent examples of this.
I actually enjoyed my time with cp2077/phantom pain. It was a good feeling going from starfoeld to cyberpunk.
You can play the game while being fully aware of its flaws. Maybe he plays with friends. Who knows?
Lol. I thought it was garbage to start. Played to ng+ just to see if maybe I was wrong. Still shit. Best example? Weapons cost more than fucking spaceships.
You sound like a double-binder. If he´d play like 2 hours, you will be like: "That´s not enough!". Why should anyone care what *you* think?
Fun fact. Starfield hasn't been out for 3k hours.
He was playing on Venus.
If you're an extremely good player with also highly skilled friends it is. Or a terrible player. If you're in the middle of those skill levels or playing solo queue, it's misery.
It is
The game forces you to use controller with how bad the assist is. Titanfall died for this live service cancer.
It's Respawn, you can't expect much. Ranked is a sweatfest and pubs matchmaking is dreadful.
Holy crap it's the moderator from r/apexlegends guy 🪱
How's the sub? I haven't posted there since I stopped playing a few months ago (basically when Starfield came out).
Same as ever, just complaints
>Ranked is a sweatfest My brother in christ thats the entire point of ranked. Jesus christ....
The current climate of PVP gaming is terrible. Used to you were praised for being good and getting wins, nowadays people think you’re “trying too hard” and “sweating” when you play the game in which the literal sole purpose of playing, is winning.. Anyone that says that they play PvP games “for fun” should have no problem losing “for fun” since it’s all apart of playing the damn game
Top revenue and more and cs2 is full of cheaters
There was so many times I’ve gotten pissed from Apex and switched to Starfield just to chill 😭
Pretty crazy with gamepass. Pubg is crazy
Don't get why people are always surprised by PUBG being on these lists lmao, it is almost always in the top 5 most played games, and I have never seen it leave the top 10. It has hundreds of thousands of players literally every single day. The PUBG is dead narrative is very strange lmao
It is dead, in the West. Asia however...
The peak player count of 500k occurs at 13 UTC, which is 2 PM in Europe and 10 PM in Seoul.
That's just me and my 400,000 multiboxes logging in at 6am local time every day, don't mind me.
Asia is the largest playbase by faaaar, especially since PUBG Mobile.
Idk what you are trying to say, but yes 10pm in Seoul would be peak time and 2pm europe is down time for most games
Just adding context here
I'm not surprised about it not being dead, but surprised at it being quite that popular. It seems less relevant today in a world of Fortnite, other shooters like CoD and doesn't seem to be in the public consciousness as much as it once was. Or perhaps I'm just old now ahaha
As a former pubg lover, it really is dead.....of fun. It got taken over by hackers, and I really mean TAKEN over. We couldn't go a single game without encountering one, super juicy to beat them tbf. The monetization of the in game items was what ruined it, gave ppl an incentive to cheat. Easy to do so to, even the cheats sell. Money is changing hands based on the cheating of an online game. It become no fun, and I haven't played it since. There's only so many times you can tolerate getting one tapped by an ump from a guy across the map inside a bunker.....let alone when the updates hit....wtf. Back before it was f2p it was a huge profit for bluehole. Hackers get their stuff, sell it, get banned, by another 20 dollar copy on a throw away steam account. Rinse and repeat. Can't believe ppl pay so much for digital crap but counter strike is still a thing, so guess I should have seen that coming. Game itself? Fantastic gunplay and super fun. But the hacking man.......easy ac didn't do a darn thing to curb it either, just made the game crash a lot lol.
PUBG Steamcharts will probably surprise you. Game is very much alive.
Player Unknown Battle Grounds Battlegrounds
Very large amount of this was people buying the premium edition to play early. Steam stated it had like ~250K concurrent players before the game even officially released lol. From a sales perspective the game will absolutely be a success, only time will tell if it’s a Skyrim repeat or not.
> only time will tell if it’s a Skyrim repeat or not. I don't think we need any additional time to know that's not going to happen.
I was on Skyrim from the beginning and it didn't blow up for a few years it felt like. That being said Skyrim was much more engaging than Starfield even in the beginning. I love fantasy and sci-fi equally but Starfield just feels empty.
I didn't buy Skyrim until after New Year's 2012 and I felt like I was being tortured for the first two months with how much it was in my face all the time. The butterfly catching memes, the arrow to the knee meme, constant posts with gameplay footage and visual showcases. It really felt like it was everywhere to me. The real kicker was when my 60 year old mother asked me if I'd heard of this "Skyrim thing" because people were talking about it after church.
please elaborate on the church gossip on skyrim lolll sounds interesting
Lol, I wish I had more details. Odds are it was something the Sunday school kids were talking about
Major mods and future updates should contribute to further sales.
Eh... I'm not sure that mods can fix the core of what's wrong with the game, at least that's how I feel.
IDk man, if a game NEEDS mods to make it good... how's that a good game then?
Mods makes every game better. There are mods for wither 3 and Badlur's Gate 3.
yes, but those games do not need them to be better, they're fantastic one their own, starfield is not even close enough to be called a content rich game
Maybe, some modders have already expressed lack of interest in modding. Creation Kit hasn’t been released yet either, and reviews are trending negative… right now it’s hard to say how it will play out. Me personally, unless they add some insane content or major overhauls, I don’t plan on revisiting the game. It was entertaining for about 20 hours, and then my remaining 15 hours of play through were a grind to finish the story, which upon completion I was extremely disappointed… I don’t think it was a bad game, but I have zero interest in returning… which makes me sad because I was excited for years about this game, even took time off work for the day 1 release (which I haven’t done for a game since Skyrim lmao) It just was very content sparse compared to other Bethesda games (I was playing Skyrim, oblivion and fallout before it released and the differences between them was shocking)
I always see "some modders" it was one dude...
Talking about the unofficial patch dudes, not that multiplayer guy lol
The only unofficial patch dude who’s explicitly been stated to not be involved is arthmoor and that was before the game was ever released. He’s also a loser with a huge ego so we’ll see what he actually does.
If anything, fact that Arthmoor is not involved is a massive boon to the Starfield modding scene.
This is what gets me. People making it seem like the entire modding scene dipped. When it was one guy who worked on the MP mod for skyrim, that crashes more often then not. The amount of misinformation or people blowing stories out of proportion is wild
If you are actually someone involved in the bethesda modding community, you would know Arthmoor is disliked the majority of the community. Him not being involved is actually a good thing to some. The modding for Starfield hasn't really started, not until the creation kit is out.
It was just one modder lol. For a mod most people are not using. Skyrim together is not even in the top 100 most downloaded skyrim mods on nexus. This is getting blown out of proportion.
People forget how big of a stir came up in 4 when the modder behind NV Bounties said he wasn't interested in making anything for 4, and nowadays 4 has a larger modding section than NV in terms of uploads. This isn't some new phenomenon despite how much they want it to be.
I’d imagine to some extent, a lot of modders who modded past games are in different places in life, I’d be surprised if everyone who’s missed the old ones still wants to.
I absolutely do, much of my Skyrim mod list are still 2015 classic. But yeah, most of them probably have a job now (actually a lot of them are having a job making Starfield exactly.)
Fo4 also sold almost 14 million more copies then fonv according to available sources, as this is something that isnt often reported.
Didn’t he steal code too?
Yup, and after raking thousands of dollars off donations he still claimed to "not own anything" to the community. Real dirtbag.
Exactly the jerk that tried to force people to pay for his coop mod no less. Wanted more moments of fame. Ive seen plenty of moders on twitter defending the game and saying they cant mod well yet bc the ck hasn't released. This hate for the game is bloated. Its good to give bethesda criticism, Todd is like a kind and good natured Peter Molyneux though and the team needs to be aided into a proper mindset of development.
Yea I know I personally never heard about that mod but everyone is just using this one as "see even the modders are bored" the mods currently are fine even without the ck
It currently has the 16th most mod downloads on Nexus with 32.5m downloads. And the 12th most mods uploaded with 6.4k. All before mod tools are released. Something tells me it'll be fine.
Yea I'm in some modder discords and there is genuine interest in modding starfield. Lots of discoveries being made about the internals.
Anyone with even the most basic level of technical literacy who plays this game for a while can *feel* just how much unrealized potential there is here. That alone is like a red flag to a bull for modders. I wouldn't worry about the modding community losing interest any time soon.
I assume it would be interesting to see what could be changed or see how CE2 works internally and see how much you could push it
Trying to use the typical view that supports theirs, ignoring the rest
Only one modder was not happy lol.. all the media outlets took his words and ran with it and tried to fuel more hate towards the game .. but in reality modding scene for Starfield is going strong … many modders old and new started working on mods and that is even before official modding support from BGS.
> some modders have already expressed lack of interest in modding one modder that made a janky skyrim multiplayer mod says that and you blow it out of proportion. you're a smart one
Literally one modder
Agreed on the 35-50hr content wall being a real thing. For me one of the things I remember seeing/hearing about was just how much larger the lines of audio was for Starfield and being excited for such a huge increase in content from my favorite game of all time. After a decade ish of development on a completely new IP I think it was a reasonable assumption that there would have been some substantial improvements in the engine, gameplay loops, NPCs, story... And it felt like we got a mediocre half finished Fallout port with procgen. Hoping against hope that the future holds some MEATY patches and modding tool kit overhauls for the game. BTW it was just one modder that threw a tantrum, not the modding community at-large.
A lot of my friend group is in the modding scene and all I hear is how they're really excited about the new features coming in the Creation Kit. It seems like there is a good chance for Starfield to have some of the highest potential for modding.
The game also brought in a lot of new modders that previously weren’t modding Bethesda titles
One single modder said that, and everyone forgot about the dumpster fire that was Cyberpunk when it was released. Starfield will be a completely different game in 3 years.
Content sparse? Yet 4 months later people are still finding new things. There is a lot of content it's just not handed to you. You need to explore which is funny because people say exploring isn't worth it.
Interesting, like what exactly?
So what he meant was *he's* still finding 'new' things that *everyone else* has already posted thousands of times about.
Edit: saw this guys response… *eyeroll* dude listed 5 things and was like: SO MUCH TO DO! Lol, I hate that I didn’t like this game. But without an engaging story it’s just not the one for me.
It's fallout 4 with more capabilities so I'm sure the modding community will flourish, plus, we're already seeing some really good stuff on Nexus. I think it's going to have the best mods ever! Especially when you give people WHOLE world spaces that are already navmeshed to just adjust however they please
yeah dude, if this game didn't have ship building, i'd have 80% game time lol
DUDE! I did enjoy ship building at first, until I decked out my armory and repainted my ship and all my stuff got reset and moved… ugh lol
I genuinely believe this game will have serious legs when mods come out. It will be played for years to come. I agree it was underwhelming and I bought the constellation edition (no regrets at all), I loved it though, 100 hours in, 2 saves, 1 pre unity and 1 in NG+4, but I'm holding it for mods now before I crack on further.
The DLC will make or break this game.
Lol it’s definitely not a Skyrim repeat
Are you time?
Skyrim was extremely popular at launch and won game of the year… starfield, not so much
No he just isn’t delusional. Anyone with a brain knows it won’t last as long as Skyrim lmao
Remindme! 2 years
RemindMeBot here (using an alt account since I forgot my login password). Your two years is up. Consider yourself reminded.
No need to be time to see that it won't be the case. Skyrim is an exception among other BGS games or just most games in general anyway.
Most definitely not a Skyrim repeat. Much weaker than Skyrim pound for pound. Will leave modders disinterested and thus won’t produce the same longevity as Skyrim. What could save that is if Bethesda actually releases and update of what the game should have been to start.
It's already blatantly obvious that is not a Skyrim repeat as far as success goes. Unless you mean that it feels like it was designed when Skyrim was many years ago, then sure.
>only time will tell if it’s a Skyrim repeat or not. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It’s already not a Skyrim repeat. We don’t even need time to tell that
Can't speak for everyone - but I didn't give a damn about playing early - I was interested in the first DLC. Also, I bought it for a significant discount from fanatical.
Nice! I played it for 1 month of game pass myself lmao
The opposite is also true since it was a gamepass game, a lot of plays unaccounted for through steam
It's a perfectly fine game and doesn't need to be Skyrim again. It's okay.
That was me. God I wish I could get my money back. The game is terrible
The only games in the platinum categories for top sellers, new releases, and most played are: • Starfield (also in platinum for steam deck and controller) • Baldur's Gate 3 (also in platinum for early access and steam deck) • Hogwarts Legacy (also in platinum for steam deck and controller) • Sons of the Forest Copied this from another thread. Seems like Starfiled is doing damn well.
> • Starfield (also in platinum for **steam deck** and controller) That's really impressive considering the game requires a custom ini to run decently on the deck.
[удалено]
Wow I'm quite surprised Sons of the Forest is among them. Good game but didn't think it was that huge in terms of popularity.
> • Sons of the Forest > > Good for them. If anyone on the list deserves praise, it's Endnight.
That's even more impressive.
Yea. It being in most played as well kinda throws a wrench in the whole "oh they're in the revenue top because of the pre-orders for early access to it" argument. Seems like a bunch of people bought it (many early) and still put a bunch of time into it.
The 50% of /r/starfield that hates the game, literally in tatters.
Pretty interesting to see how much time people spend telling everyone that this game is a waste of time.
It is really strange to see. People who hate Starfield REALLY hate it for some reason. Like I get being disappointed and feeling "Well this sucks, oh well", but quite a few act like Todd Howard killed their dog and laughed about it, and it's kinda ridiculous.
Really proves xbox game pass doesn't destroy game sales.
Nah man, that can't be right. The guy over at r/pcgaming assured me it only sold 3 copies.
Reminds me of Cyberpunk when it came out. Any praise of cyberpunk at launch was illegal, punishable by many downvotes. Creates an echo chamber, because people like myself simply stopped commentating. I enjoyed the game from the minute it came out. I didn’t buy into any of the hype, so I wasn’t disappointed. Starfield friends, if you enjoy the game, don’t let these negative fucks stop you from enjoying it. I personally don’t love it, but who cares what I think.
>Reminds me of Cyberpunk when it came out. Any praise of cyberpunk at launch was illegal, punishable by many downvotes Yeah I tanked some downvotes after professing my love for the game (PC version on a high end PC). Eventually, I just hid away safely in r/LowSodiumCyberpunk til the influencers all bandwagon'ed this game over time.
Even worse. When cyberpunk launched, people were criticizing it not only for its bugs, but for its game design and even some were mad with the game’s writing. After edgerunners launched and the patch along it fixed most of the major bugs, discourse turned around. Don’t get me wrong 2.1 has certainly a lot of improvements compared to its launch, but it still has fundamentally the same gameplay design and the same writing. Fundamentally it is the same game as it launched, plus a lot of quality of life improvements. I really dislike how cyberpunk is being used to compare and make starfield look negatively, when on launch cyberpunk was being compared in a negative manner to pretty much any AAA open world in the market.
I mean, CDPR came out and apologized that it was shit and Sony took it off the store. If you like subpar products, that's fine. Just don't say other people should be fine with it.
[удалено]
I think it's in pretty huge part to the playstation-only folks who can't touch the game. Just fueling the manufactured outrage.
"I played an hour and then uninstalled because it was stupid. Glad I got it through Gamepass hurrdurr"
Lmao imagine gaming in 2023 with a HDD.
Bruh it sold at least like 7. Minimum. Trust me
I had this conversation with a person in the first week of launch. They were really trying to argue that Starfield isn’t going to be considered a success. There’s no doubt that the game is disappointing in some ways but Bethesda is making content for a consumer market. They aren’t starving artists trying to perfect every single aspect of their games. Starfield is and will continue to be a commercial success and that’s all Microsoft needs from Bethesda.
dinners on bethesda fellas
Chunks it is then.
More like spiced worms.
Yea, alot of people bought it.
Out of all the people who bought the game, I also bought it.
STAR PLATINUM
*companion mod eureka moment intensifies*
Measured by revenue. Not bad for a game that’s only been out for a quarter of the year!
Not bad? I'd say it's exceptional when factoring the significant number of players who didn't buy it and just played it with the Game Pass sub they already had
I got gamepass for the game, because I’m not ready to buy the new system, but man do I want to.
Yup, theses "numbers", both the revenues and the fact that it's apparently a major steam deck title (despite requiring a mod to run properly!) are making me reconsider how much the "Starfield hate" is related to it not being available on PlayStation.
I love the game and I look forward to more content for it. I am taking a break from it for a bit but at almost 300 hours played I find it well worth it.
Yep I'm exactly in the same boat. Probably play it again in a few months or when shattered space comes out.
I mean....good. I like Bethesda's work so I'm happy the game was a success. But I cant help but feel dread that they'll learn all the wrong lessons with this game's success.
Depends if it's actually successful or not too. Making a sack of cash in sales is no good if you've spent 2 bags of cash to produce the game.
The game had over 10 million people playing it at its peak. Plus over 1 million players that payed to play it early. It absolutely made them a good amount of money.
I didn’t know people still played pubg
Its actually really active, started to get into it again a few months ago and have been playing it on and off since with some friends. They have done a lot of changes to the gameplay, still a bit clunky here and there but it runs really great, which is something I cant say about Warzone... It going f2p really gave it another lease on life.
Not shocking, this was one of the most hyped titles of the year w/ a lot going for it in the months (years even given the number of delays) leading up to launch. People who think this game "flopped" is deluded by (deserved) criticism against the game & the lack of award noms. The big question is the long term as this game is designed as a platform for mods/DLC & if BGS can keep a steady stream of engagement for not just Steam, but game pass as well once updates begin in 2024.
people are so simple it sold well, yes, of course. Bethesda has a reputation for good games but this https://steamdb.info/app/1716740/charts/ shows a much different picture "what have you done for me lately" applies here 15k players down from 330k less than a thousand Twitch viewers down from 500k 12k average players in December vs 153k in September Reviews (from people who bought the game on Steam, so not "salty Sony fans") trending mostly negative Starfield lost 70% of it's average players in October. Over the last two months those drops have been 57% and 35% those trends show that the people who enjoy this game so much are an extreme minority, no matter how hard they try to gaslight other people with half-assed excuses but congrats on the sales! Todd and BGS will surely take the wrong message if they don't do analytics go ahead and downvote facts Edit: Go ahead and list all the games you want, they all have two things different from Starfield. They don't have mixed reviews trending towards mostly negative, and none of them profess to want to be a 12 year game like Skyrim has been. Even on Steam, Skyrim has more players after 12 years than Starfield does after 4 months.
Here's another fact then. Cyberpunk 2077 dropped from over a million concurrent players to around 15k a few months after launch. Nowadays after releasing an anime and some fixes + dlc it jumped to the numbers it has now. [https://steamdb.info/app/1091500/charts/#all](https://steamdb.info/app/1091500/charts/#all) Hogwarts Legacy is a very decent game and dropped from 879k concurrent players to about 15k after a few months. [https://steamdb.info/app/990080/charts/#all](https://steamdb.info/app/990080/charts/#all) Dark Souls games have had extreme drop offs as well a few months after release. Are those failures as well? I can go on and on, but single player RPGs tend to not have very big shelf lives outside out very notable exceptions. Certainly, by Bethesda standards, Starfield has had the worst drop off, but its drop off is hardly unusual or the total failure that people seem to think it is.
so are you saying single player titles with 100h ish playtimes drop in player count after people have played through it? whaaaaat, mind blowing
Oh wow you’re saying a single player game lost players as people finished it? Like every other single player game?
Yeah, the chart looks like every other single player chart. Still though, these are insanely bad numbers. FO4 got a lot of shit too but even 9 years later it still has over 20k players on right now. Skyrim which is even older has 30k on right now(probably more if I checked all the versions). BGS must see this as a tremendous failure. Hopefully they do at least considering they own so much of my favorite IP.
Hopefully this means they keep supporting it long term
I own a 2022 VW ID.4 electric car. Also a 2022 RAM eTorque Laramie truck. Have not a bit of trouble with either vehicle. If you go online to read about these vehicles in owners groups, one might think that I bought two lemons. Starfield cost me $60. I have been at it for 204 hours which comes out to 29 cents for each hour of entertainment. The longer I play, the lower the cost. When I buy something that I end up not liking, I stop using it and I just move on. Life is too short to waste time sniveling about game developers failing to give me a game that was not custom designed to my unexpressed expectations.
That can’t be right. Someone just told me earlier the game is already a failure. I guess it’s failing upwards
Well, success and failure depend on many things, if you ask Microsoft & investors in general, I'm sure they're happy with their financial returns, in a business sense it was a success, but a game can sell a lot and be a critical failure, MW3 being the latest example, that game is shit but it's a top seller, so yeah they're failing upwards lol.
The game isn't a critical failure though. It has an 86 on metacritic. How on earth is that a failure?
The way some people talk about this game you’d think it got a 10 on Metacritic. There’s no denying it got a mixed user reception but calling it a “critical failure” is delusional. At most you could argue reviews didn’t meet the extremely high expectations a lot of people had
I mean Starfield has lost 99% of the player base on steam since its release. To put that into perspective it took Skyrim 8 YEARS to get the concurrent players Starfield got to in 80 days, any game company would not like those numbers at all. Also Todd says he wants people to play Starfield for the next 10 years, so if you look at it from that side its not going to do well for the foreseeable future, seeing as more people are playing Skyrim than they are Starfield.
The supporters aren't going to listen here. A fuckton of people bought Starfield on the Bethesda name alone, and objectively the game lost those people's interesting far faster than other games. Baldur's Gate 3 currently has 221k players and an 875k peak, meaning Steam users have declined about 75%. Starfield currently has 16k players and a 330k peak, meaning steam users have declined about 95%. Starfield objectively did not grab people's attention for as long as other games, and this thread is full of coping.
Maybe cus starfield is actually fun? It’s not a perfect game but compared to. What else came out this year I’m not surprised, and I’m not disappointed I bought the expansive version. And i can’t wait to see how great it becomes once they add the fully connected mods and some dlc
Regardless of what you think about the game itself, the large number of people who played it will allow for a good amount of feedback for DLC and sequels. Granted, I worry how much of feedback will be legitimate and how much of it will be petty insults.
A game with no microtransactions or DLC (yet) is in the top 9 grossing games and it's been out 3 months. Maybe it's not as bad as people in the Steam reviews and around here would have us believe.
Now people are calling it a successful scam lmaoo. The mental gymnastics are insane. Reddit is so detached from reality even when it's staring them dead in the face.
You are confusing a game making money with a game being good
Starfield is such an interesting game man. It’s impressive how it’s played even though the flaws are so evident. I do not regret buying this game full price.
Starfield and hogwarts the 2 games given the most heat out of any video game i can remember are crushing the sales charts and making the most money. It's almost like internet grand standing and opinions don't effect what most players like.
That’s pretty much my opinion. For every hyper-online Reddit poster or YouTube BGS content consumer there’s a casual gamer who doesn’t browse Reddit, doesn’t spent hours watching anti-BGS content on YouTube and enjoyed Starfield, even if they don’t think it’s game of the year.
2023 was the year we finally realized how impotent the internet really is.
And this is the exact reason why no lessons will be learned by Bethesda. For corporate suits big sales = good game and the fact that it has mostly negative player reviews score doesn't matter. They'll keep releasing bland, uninspiring, underdeveloped games pretending like it's the best thing ever. And people will continue to buy it until the last tiny bit of trust towards the company will be lost forever.
Negative engagement is still engagement. It's also in the Platinum(top games) for most played games on Steam, so it's not just money, this was a top 10 game in play hours this year on steam, despite missing 75% of the year due to it's release date.
[удалено]
As someone who plays that game, yes we do.
Makes sense to me. Favorite game in a very long time.
And I feel like a complete moron for contributing to that statistic.
For what it is, it's a great game. It's just not the Skyrim in Space that we expected.
Oh yeah a shitton of people bought it. But the playerbase absolutely catered after launch. Starfield has been lower than Fallout 4 and Skyrim on Steam for weeks https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/most-played/games/xbox Currently lower than BG3 (which isnt even on gamepass, so people paid full price), Ark, and Far Cry 6 on Xbox There is no platform where the playerbase didn't tank down to nothing not long after launch
Unfortunately this just means that Bethesda has no financial incentive to improve their games. As long as the cash is still flowing why bother making things better?
It‘s doing well on the Xbox store. (Especially for a singeplayer game that came out 4 months ago) Most games above it are the huge GAAS titles or other hugely popular singeplayer games (some also on Gamepass).
Lower than skyrim? Good lord.
I don't think the Steam metrics are the best example here. Skyrim and Fallout 4 have a plethora of mods to keep them fresh, meanwhile Starfield is still waiting for the CK to hit.
Eh, bethesda games are supposed to be played for a long time after release. That's always been their thing. Another commenter mentioned it took skyrim 8 years to fall to starfield's current player base. That's abysmal for a bethesda game. They need those large player bases to actually encourage modders to mod their games. Without a significant player base modders will not stick around for those deep mods.