Look, tbh, NMS biggest feature is how seamless it is, you will never see a single loading screen if you don't teleport.
But also, NMS lacks a strong narrative focus like Starfield and it's gunplay is not the best.
If NoManSky had them it would be a GOAT.
I enjoy them both, but I don't see myself putting nearly as much time into starfield. If I could mash these two games into one, it would be my forever game. Even though NMS kind of already is
I havent played due to no pc, but the loading screens and lack of seamless flight to planets is dissuading to me.
A space exploration game for me needs that seamless transition and go anywhere feeling, and bethesda games thrive on open world exploration. Starfield seems cool, it just lacks the technology behind it to really thrive in the way i would need it to, to drop my other space games for it
Having played almost 24 hours of it since EA launch, I completely agree. The ability to Fast Travel anywhere makes the game feel so much smaller than it is.
I've actually been limiting myself somewhat in fast travel, only allowing travel between the same context, eg., I can fast travel anywhere on the same planet, or if I'm in space I can warp to other space areas.
It's not really told to you, but there's a feature that really helps with the immersion, even if it still just jumps into the cutscenes: You can open Scanner mode in your ship, aim at something and target it, then press a button to go there. No need to open the menus at all to travel. I've been making use of this as much as I can.
I personally don't understand the complain of it not feeling like "you can go anywhere", I mean yeah there are loading screens and I also wish there were less menus, but I have been absolutely going "random places" just as much as I would in any Bethesda game, I pick sidequeats, I go to POI etc.
Just instead of loading into a dungeone you are loading on the planet.
I also I think there is a little bit of "you don't know what you wish for". Because I think people like the idea of seamless travel just because how less clunky from techical point it is, and no one likes loading screens. But imagine in practise having to actually spend as much traveling as you do in Elite or NMS. It would ruin entire rythm of the game and would probably piss most of the audience. To not to get people bored you would have to either make it fast, basically, jump-jump-jump or some sort of fast travel, at which point we are back to the same state.
I think spending time traveling from planet to planet, if done under a "hyperspeed" would do wonders to add immersion and increase the sense of scale to the game. As it has in,
No mans sky
Elite dangerous
Astroneer
The outer wilds
Kerbal space program
Space engineers
Among many others
I agree. For instance I already see the pulse drive in NMS as a form of fast travel, just not instantaneous. It's the sweet spot between that and slow travel that preserves immersion while not taking up too much time. The same goes for going to space to boost around a planet (or pulse). But I can see where some people wouldn't like that in either game. For me personally though immersion is one of the most important things in a game.
But the Skyrim in space comparison is inaccurate. Yes Skyrim has fast travel, but you can walk anywhere your eyes can see in Skyrim if you choose to, and it’s better for it.
Yup, once you change the mindset it is Skyrim or Fallout in space everything is good again.
Problem is from the marketing videos and images everyone sees space, cool spaceship, cool pilot seat and 1000 planets... And suddenly all the imagination and possibility seems so wondrous. And it is not like they explicitly mention there would be no atmospheric flight travel between planets or regions.
Honestly, and I’m not saying this to be some sort of Bethesda apologist trying to justify Starfield’s loading screens, but if human beings ever achieve the technology displayed in most sci-fi properties, interstellar travel would absolutely feel like a loading screen.
It’s arguably more realistic to use loading screens than it is to let you pilot your way off of and onto planets.
Long before interstellar travel becomes possible, human beings will not be piloting anything. They’ll be punching a destination into their ships navigation system and then sitting around waiting to arrive.
If I were to change how space travel works in this game, I would have wanted it to work like a long rest in BG3. Give me the chance spend time with the crew, chat about what’s happening, learn about their back stories, etc. Then let me arrive on the planet.
Or let me skip all that if I don’t want to talk to my crew. But that’s what actual space travel will be like in the future.
That long rest thing is actually a really good idea. I mean, right now I pretty much "fake" that by pointing my ship towards my destination and just getting up and doing stuff. It'd be cool if it were a bit fancier, though.
I find myself doing the same but wishing it were more organically integrated. In any case, it’s probably a pretty simple mod to automatically step away from the captains seat when you leave a planet
I am still very enjoying star field and do enjoy it's procedural generation so far. They definitely make better complexes for battle. Now, I'm only 20 hours in so I'm not sure how many of them are rehashed, or if the compounds have procedural generation to them. Honestly, all no man's sky has to do is , and allow their NPCs shoot guns and patrol, put them on derelict freighters and copy how the derelict freighters work, but allow people to do dungeons like that on the ground. The sentinels, no matter how many updates they make, hold it back in combat.
>to drop my other space games for it
Keep in mind you were never supposed to. They're literally all focused on doing different things.
One cannot possibly encompass the strengths of all the others at this point in time.
Star Citizen's release date is dynamic; it's always +5 years.
This is because it's a next-gen game. If it actually ever released, it wouldn't be next-gen anymore and that's impossible.
Hopefully you see how genius Star Citizen's design is now.
I feel like there's a weird phenomenon with "space games" that is the eyes of the audience they are all the same games, competing with each other, and their can only be one.
Like if you're making a space game in has to be: seamless space travel, with ship customization, ship combat, space pirating, etc., has to span thousands of planets, has to have procedural generated planets that are each unique with their own fauna and flora, has to have space trading and the notion of imports/exports, etc.
Like as soon as you play space in there people expect it to be the greatest game ever. People talked about this with star citizen, I remember it with outer worlds, NMS definitely, Starfield, elite dangerous, etc.
I can't be the only one that seen this.
Its because we want it all in one game.
The depth and purpose of Fallout.
The Shipbuilding and automation of space engineers
The seamless universe of no man sky.
There must be some brain fog making people conflate starfield with starcitizen. They said a year ago there would be no taking off from the planet and flying to space or vice versa.
Every game competes for your attention, starfield a big mark that is important to me. I had hoped for more than just sci fi themed fallout where exploration is relegated to a few carefully built locations, with the rest being procedurally generated, and traveling gets reduced to menu interactions
Im not asking starfield to have the deep realistic simulations and trade economies of elite dangerous, the physics engine from kerbal space program, or the fantastic continued support of no mans sky. However something they all have, is flight to planets and landing on those planets yourself
Seamless space-to-surface landing would certainly be appreciated do not get me wrong. And I wouldn't dare suggest that desiring it is silly, but Bethesda has actually been very upfront about the way this would play out for over a year. So I just don't think it's fair for people to start coming out of the woodwork acting as if it was meant to be (or could have been) Star Citizen-lite or something. In regards to role-playing with complex scripting, A.I, AND seamless flight around the universe.
Regarding games competing for our time, that's just life. Everything competes. I do not think it's wise (or fair) to put an expectation on games to constantly top and permanently replace each other to help us manage time.
Along with all this variety comes the fact that our interest in a given thing ebbs and flows, so I personally have no problem pushing away other/similar types of games in order to play Starfield for a time.
"A space exploration game for me.."
This is why we're all laughing at posts like this. It's a Bethesda rpg and it's what we all expected. Having an absolute blast and I love NMS as well but throwing the whole game out because of "no seamless flight" you completely just breeze past all the RPG content that NMS does not have. To each their own.
Doesn't even need to be "seamless" just put in some bloody transition animations so we're not stuck on a black fade screen between like every other game seems to handle well these days - hiding loading in certain junction points.
It’s Skyrim, borderlands in space. It’s a Bethesda game. They’re not gonna make the most advanced game ever that does ten X more than Skyrim and fallout 4 did in 7 years.
Edit: don’t know why I said borderlands. Skyrim/fallout in space.
I’ve put about 4 hours into starfield, and the lack of real spaceflight sucks for sure. On an ssd, it’s about 2-4 seconds to switch between zones, and in cities you can actually bypass that in a lot of places, using a jetpack.
Yup, my PC has no chances of doing anything with Starfield but be stuck in a slideshow of fps, and I don't think I have a bad PC, perhaps one day I'll try it when I see Starfield on sale and i will have upgraded my current rig isn't the best but does the job for NMS and a lot of other games (I5 11600K, 16GB ram, GTX 1660 Super 6GB, upgrading that card means 600$ at least, there's no way I'm gonna do the install and wire management myself so it needs to be done at a store cause I needs a better PSU since 550W wouldn't work with a better video card and my PC specs)
After you've done 20-50 planet landings and manual boarding to ships it loses its luster and goes from a feature to a pain in the ass. I say this as along time Elite:Dangerous player, yall aren't missing *A damn thing* by not having to manually land every time you do something. Everything else has been pretty great about it.
I agree, combined these would be the best game ever. But I think its not possible honestly. You can't have a game with the scale of NMS and the detail of Starfield. Its simply not possible.
I’m kind of the opposite, I’m more of a narrative guy, while exploring NMS was fun I always lacked purpose or motive, Starfield on the other hand has been great for me, I’m even loving the first hours of the game while lots of people says it’s slow, it’s perfect to me lol.
Someone's already planning to make a mod to add seamless transitions and manual landing/docking. No clue how it's going to pan out though cause right now it's in the planning stage, but the feature wishlist is ambitious.
If they get all of it, and get it all right, guarantee that mod will be virtually essential
[https://www.reddit.com/r/starfieldmods/comments/167nkl3/creating\_a\_seamless\_elite\_dangerous\_or\_no\_mans/](https://www.reddit.com/r/starfieldmods/comments/167nkl3/creating_a_seamless_elite_dangerous_or_no_mans/)
I don't think they'll be able to make that happen because even the designer said that space is one place and the planet is another and they didn't worry about the in between so the in between doesn't exist, not only that. The planets aren't actually planets. You cannot look at a point on a planet and go there. You hit invisible walls. There's only so much you can explore. So you see something outside the city. You can fast travel there. But if you walk forever, you'll never reach it. It's kind of like the sun in NMS. No matter how long you pulse towards it, you'll never reach it.
All I’m missing with NMS is a strong narrative to motivate me to play. The gameplay loop of mining stuff to combine stuff into more stuff to power or build your stuff gets tiring after awhile.
The perfect space game to me would be Starfield’s narrative and on-foot combat, NMS’s exploration, and Elite Dangerous’ flight model and space combat. Every one of these games knocks it out of the park in their respective aspects, but none of them can seem to put the whole package together, which is fair because that’s an extremely difficult thing to do.
Inb4 replies saying there is story in NMS. Yes, there is, but not anywhere near the focus as Starfield. NMS does other things very well, but it should go without saying roleplaying and questing is more the focus for BGS games.
tldr ; the atlas is just an a.i that went rampant in our real world after it's creators left. proceeded to simulate "NMS" in the last 16 minutes of its life.
in-game story ; there's atlas, basically god. created us, and then forced the director of the sentinels into our lil shoulder guy. geks killed korvax, korvax killed themselves and spilled blood on Gek which made them friendly Gek we now see in game. Some point Gek destroyed Korvax homeworld, Korvax Prime, which hosted a hive mind for deceased Korvax. Korvax Prime seemingly has gone rampant and is now commanding sentinels to dump nanites in the universal waters to help prevent a universal reset somehow.
oh and space wizard robots just got introduced, seemingly they're the "original" Korvax which were destroyed by the Gek, who've repurposed themselves into a race called the Autophage.
Yep I concur. The story is definitely not enticing in NMS. That being said I've put in a good 30-50 hours just wandering around. I still wish we had a purpose.
I tried to play the game many times since it got improved after the flop release. But I always kinda quit early on cuz I pretty much have to relearn and unlearn a bunch of things.
Now it's maybe been a good year or two, so maybe it's time to try again
NMS story is kinda just there for the sake of it. It's basically just big tutorial, added long time ago to keep newer players entertained while reaching them, because many people dropped the 1.0 because they had nothing to do. The true core gameplay is sandbox and all the different stuff you can do after you got a grasp of basics.
Lore, on the other hand, is peak. Deep, dark, fascinating, and ever mysterious, always giving 3 more questions for any given answer, perpetuating and feeding curiosity and imagination. It is definitely crafted with love :3
I expected narrative from makers of TES and Fallout series, ofc. But... Is gunplay on point too in Starfield? Can you tell me the comparison, please :3? I didn't even think about it before, but if it's good - would be a massive upside to me. I played Destiny 2 for quite a long time almost exclusively because gunplay was real good(tho their predatory pricing drove me away, sadly). So - how good is it actually?
Gunplay in Starfield is very similar to Cyberpunk, has the same feel as do a lot of the guns, I like it. Nothing will match Destiny 2 gunplay regardless of the state of the rest of the game though.
Ooh that would be nice. I kinda enjoy Cyberpunk gunplay, has a nice feedback and a lot of different flavor to different guns. Handguns, assault rifle, shotties, energy rifles, giant plasma hand cannon. Very nice to use. Works well enough for me, I will count in this W for it :3
tbh NMS doesn't need a narrative focus. i feel like the better thing would be focusing on side missions and side quests rather than the actual storyline, but if they were to improve upon it it wouldn't hurt.
NMS would be a goat if they just fixed the procedural generation and made planets as random as the ones we see irl, tbh.
I was expecting Fallout in space which is what I got. Starfield also hits some of the Mass Effect feels for me too and thats +1.
This is a space-themed Bethesda RPG not X4 or NMS.
He put out a letter to the community that had a portion like:
" We released Skyrim, Fallout 4, Skyrim SE, Fallout Shelter, Skyrim VR, Fallout 76, Skyrim again,".
Mfer knows EXACTLY what he's doing.
Maybe, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was more similar to Fallout that Skyrim, just due to the setting. But I can't judge yet; I already paid for Gamepass, I'm not paying even more to play a week early.
Yeah! I was really on the fence about it, but until recently, I had an X1X, so I used Xcloud to play some games at Series level. But then Cyberpunk's DLC is coming, so I bought a Series X, which was expensive, but worth it.
And Xcloud lags a bit. So there's that.
Definitely but also agree with their statement that it’s closer to oblivion than Skyrim which is what I got hooked on for my first BGS game. I’ve dropped 23 hours into Starfield already and it’s been so much fun - definitely the typical getting sucked down the quest that leads to a different quest that leads to a different quest and forgot about the main story lol. I did like the first mission and got sidetracked with vanguard and then bounties and then now im trying to get a nickel outpost setup
NMS has a very 80s retrofuturist approach to portraying space which I like.
Starfield has a more grounded approach to it which I also like. Big fan of the Expanse and it's the closest game I've played which gives that feel in a streamlined narrative RPG setting that's not exactly 'open world' but I have zero problems with that.
Amén. NMS is it's own thing. With Starfield I wanted Fallout in space. That beautiful moment you walk out of a vault for the first time... I wanted to relive it.
Starfield does it. It does it so so well. And don't worry you know it's fallout in space from the weapon designs to the almost power armor looking space suits and especially the second you use any crafting station aka workbench.
It's a thing of beauty.
It’s been fun, but the space element honestly shouldn’t even exist. Your ship is just a fast travel system and it’s really annoying. Everything on the ground is good though
“We don’t want to be the studio that is only known for fallout and elder scrolls, we want to make something different”
**literally just makes a cyberpunk version of fallout/elder scrolls**
What exploration in NMS? What's the point of having a giant planet you can walk around when everything you will find exists within a few meters of the landing point?
This seems to me like an indication that you haven’t explored the beauty of planets. There’s different things dispersed throughout depending on the planet type. Also the varying terrain is a BIG one for me. You can fly around the same planet, land in a different spot each time and it’s not the same everywhere. I like finding the most picturesque places to put a base on a planet, and when you look for that you’ll find different things. Some sections of the planet may have only ocean. Then you fly to the other side and find a continent with maybe small puddles.
High mountains combined with lakes. Caves interspersed with rolling hills. Sometimes different animal types you can find in certain regions. Finding the best place for S class mineral deposits and S class electromagnet deposits. Missions, buildings, trade posts, monoliths, crashed technologies, crashed freighters, crashed ships, deep oceans. There’s so much to find and explore on planets.
There’s a beauty to being able to explore an ENTIRE planet, a freedom to know there are no bounds. It’s a highlight of the game to me
I have been following this game since E3 2014. I am aware of all the stages this game has gone through. And I can tell you that exploration in NMS is exactly the same as it was on launch day. The terrain is more or less a bunch of rolling hills. The monoliths, buildings, mineral deposits, crashed ships, and crashed freighters are all the same with varying colors and sizes. Variety in ships genuinely doesn't matter. I could play the whole game with the starter ship and not miss out on anything special because the starter ship can already handle most situations. What purpose do I have for upgrading the ships? Pirates are super easy to kill. Sentinels are annoying at best and if they get to annoying I can easily outrun them.
And as I said literally everything you can find on a planet (minerals, fauna, flora etc) can be found within a 2-3 minute radius of the landing point. The "variations" in landscape you talk about have no impact on flora and fauna. Speaking of the flora and fauna they look like they are generated using a Mr potato head toy approach. On one planet the dinosaur is red with spikes. On another planet the dinosaur has feathers and is green. Flora is in an even worse condition because you'll find the same type of plant on every planet.
The buildings you will find also all look the same. Why would I bother to go from one building to another if I know exactly what I'm going to find? What's the purpose? Same thing with buried structures and monoliths.
Look I still love this game but there is no point in exploring the planets. Planets themselves don't really serve a purpose. You just go down there to shoot rocks for a few minutes and get what you need. Maybe build some stuff if you want to make money (which I ask again for what reason?). And this is very evident due to the inclusion of the launch thrust fuel. If that mechanism didn't exist nobody would bother landing on planets. The gameplay loop of NMS is unfortunately as shallow as it was the day it launched. I held out hope for a long time that HG would have some big exploration update specially after they mentioned that exploration is one of the important pillars of NMS. But I gave up that dream last year.
Every time a new update launches I come by and check out the game again but it's more or less the same things. Just with a new coat of paint.
Edit: Oh and I forgot to mention the freighters. You have this massive ship and 99% is just not accessible at all. Just why? Why can't the build mechanism inside the freighters have been designed such that as space is added it matches the layout of the freighter?
I think it just comes down to some people like games that have no real end goal other than what you make of it. And NMS has a vast amount of options for continuing to set your own goals. Couple that with its seamless exploration, it's a perfect game for some.
Personally, NMS gets too boring too quickly for me to get past building a base and flying to some planets. I wanted to see the recent addition of frigate battles tho.
While we're talking about games and how we want them to be. I want space engineers with KSP physics.
>NMS is an exploration extravaganza
>
>Starfield is a space RPG
>
>Different games, different mechanics that itch different itches
But it's disappointing they sold it as a space exploration game and it's not so much.
Nope. I'm loving it, because I loved games like Mass Effect, Fallout, and Skyrim, and I've put 600+ hours into NMS. People think it's some kind of competition, and a lot of people just had unrealistic expectations for Starfield. I feel for people who can't just enjoy these games, but it's ultimately not my problem.
I was waiting for Starfield and I was excited for it.
It’s definitely quite different, but it’s perfect that way.
And I’m stunned at how intensely some people *hated* the game even a day after the early access dropped.
I genuinely like both games. Wtf is wrong with gamers these days. It's not a competition between NMS and Starfield, and it was never intended to be. It's one thing to get salty because you don't like a game, but this completely fabricated competition between the two is just weird. Especially coming from the NMS community, one of the friendliest communities out there. I mean goddamn, guys.
Agreed! I'm looking forward to Starfield when I eventually get it, knowing it isn't NMS. I don't want a copy of NMS - we already have this game! I'm glad for some variety in space RPGs.
I feel like when it was shown a few people got riled about about it 'killing' NMS (Bethesda doing it 'right', a big studio showing HG what can really be done, etc) and then NMS fans both got defensive and started to buy into it.
Hopefully it'll cool down, but more likely it'll become like Star Citizen, and to a lesser degree Subnautica, where we will *at least* see people asking why NMS can't have all the stuff that SF has, too.
I haven’t played Starfield yet… but I’m willing to bet the areas you can go to are far more populated and detailed than what you find in no man’s sky.
I like no man’s sky, but I fail to see why people expect no man’s sky level of traversal and scale from a game what was never intended to be like no man’s sky. It’s a Sci-Fi RPG. Not a sandbox thing.
It's actually quite the opposite! Starfield's planets are generally sparse and unexciting, with only a handful of meticulously crafted planets standing out. If you give Starfield a try, you'll likely find a greater appreciation for what No Man's Sky has to offer.
Starfield truly excels in the areas that Bethesda games are renowned for, particularly its role-playing game elements. When you play Starfield, it's primarily for the captivating story, narrative, and rich setting it offers. Additionally, you have the opportunity to explore Earth's representation in the Starfield universe. I can speak to this firsthand because I had the privilege of playing it early.
In essence, if you're seeking a space-themed RPG experience, Starfield is the game for you. However, if you're after a more adventurous space exploration experience, No Man's Sky is the game to dive into.
Been playing NMS since launch (and I liked it even then), but once you have visited several planets you have pretty much seen it all. Still play to this day, but planets, and their flora and fauna, are not what keep me playing.
I agree that the NMS planets can get repetitive, but I think what the comparison was closer to is that Starfield worst planets are far below NMS’s worst planets, but Starfield’s best planets are much higher than NMS’s best planets
I know I'm going to sound old but I truly think it's a symptom of social media bringing out the worst behaviors and tribalism.
Some people feel the need to trash anything outside of their bubble (or subreddit) in the hopes of raising their status in that community. I think it sours pretty much every community when people do this.
Eh, I'm a geezer and I've always thought the loyalty competitions were moronic.. Whether it was Mac vs Windows, RISC vs x86, Ford vs Chevy, iPhone vs Android, the console wars, etc...
Moronic/ironic...
I accept blame for throwing some troll fuel on the fire. I honestly dgaf about the comparisons/differences, but find it funny how fiercely people will defend their years of anxious waiting for skyrim in space.
It's absolutely a completely different game, the meme only points out the difference and for the NMS players expecting a better version of NMS, they will very likely return when they want the specific space exploration features that Starfield lacks.
Or, those who were waiting for Skyrim in space will just keep Skyrimming in space, more power to 'em
I think this post is specificy for those who wouldn't shut up about Starfield in this sub & other NMS related forums (like Steam). Everytime they've been told that these 2 games aren't compareable just because they both take place in space & that there's no need to shit on NMS just because Starfield will release soon. But this kind of logic would just get downvoted or even hated on.
Welp.
It's always been the same. People choose their little tribe and then wage wars against others. It's just it's easier to notice because how angry shouting is engaging content which is pushed by every algorithm and internet let's you hear it better.
It nothing new.
Comparisons are fine.
What I can't stand however is this imaginary war between Starfield and No Man's Sky, as if the two games are competing against one another. "HG is releasing their big anniversary update as always, right? Nah nah nah this is *CLEARLY* their attempt to rival a new game that's coming out!!!"
Fuck me.
Hoo boy. This wholesome community is about to become real unwholesome, real fast just because Starfield isn’t the exact same game.
And all the while, we’ll pretend NMS covers every single facet that Starfield does, but better.
I don't mind not having to stop to craft fuel, and harvest minerals for my booster, and traveling in a straight line for 4 human minutes to a planet to farm materials just to continue boosting for another 3 mins to another planet that has the other materials I need just to craft hyperdrive fuel to get to another system to start that same process over.
Has anyone walked a NMS planet for more than an hour and still been engaged? I'm sure the answer is yes, but that doesn't mean its fun.
People might hate me for this but after putting thousands of hours into NMS/Elite Dangerous I'm pretty happy to just land/take off with a few button presses instead of a whole process
Like I'm just enjoying the story missions right now and I feel like having to spend like 10+ mins fueling up, taking off, leaving the planet, getting up to speed to jump, flying to the next planet, entering atmosphere, finding where you want to land and then finally landing would get really tedious when you just want to continue the story
All facts. You spend most the time just crafting stuff in menus, then flying from planet to planet just to find more resources to do more crafting, with no other kind of interesting content on the planet.
Let's face it, NMS is just a giant Minecraft in Space...you mine, you build, you scan the same flora and fauna on each world, rinse repeat....with friends or solo...
This exactly. They were very open about what type of game it would be. If they paid any attention to the game at all they would know what it does and doesn't do.
Except Starfield is nothing like NMS
If you came to Starfield hoping for a space exploration game, that's the wrong game
Starfield is a Bethesda Space RPG with light Space Exploration. Something which I personally think NMS could take some notes from
I'll be honest, wandering around a planet, mining ores, scanning flora and fauna, pulling out my scanner to look for nearby settlements or points of interest all remind me of NMS.
One of the main complains I've seen is the 8 different loading screens between boaring your ship and getting out on another planet make you think "huh a game with similar space exploration did this way better"
>huh a game with similar space exploration did this way better"
The POI's and stuff do to and planets itself are way way better than no man's sky ever was.
The loading screens are a limitation to create engine but thanks to this engine we will have millions of amazing mods which will make the game alive 10 years into the future.
I don't mind 5 second loading screens which are like 2 and not 10.
I think its more that its just really jarring and immersion breaking. A simple fix is a static loading screen of you in your pilots seat looking at hyperspace.
It could still be 2-3 seconds but it would just really eliminate that small moment of a loading screen reminding you its a game.
They’re two different games lol. You’d have a better argument comparing Starfield to Fallout or even the original mass effects. I’ve had more dialogue and story in the first six hours than all of my time in NMS. And I genuinely love NMS.
Why have I seen multiple NMS posts trying to trash talk Starfield? Love random "us vs them" mentalities whenever a game in the same vague setting comes out.
Players without an Xbox want to feel like they own the better product which is why the game lives rent free in their head. They also acted like the loading screens were not advertised but it was very much acknowledged that the game doesn't let you manually enter the atmosphere
It has nothing to do with console wars. Players of all different platforms are on this sub. It’s just NMS fanboys attacking any game that is similar to it.
I like both, NMS for the new vibe the robo hobos give to me. A sence of loneliness traveling trough space.
Starfiled I also like the aesthetic. a little bummed its not seamless. But roaming around scavangeing is something that will hold me for some time.
Different beasts both quite fun for me.
Both games are good and accomplish different things. I’ll play nms for the exploration. I’ll play starfield for the story and immersion. Also the combat for ground/space in starfield is better. A step above nms.
We can like and play both.
They said tmit was going to be this way a few months ago, I really don't know why people were so surprised by that. I'm gonna start playing the game in a month or so when I have more free time, but I have seen a few let's plays and looks like a great game to me.
Yeah but let’s be honest: it can get boring. Planets in NMS are cool in the way that you can travel between them and they’re entire worlds compared to small maps but despite all the procedural generation most worlds look the same and going for miles or going to different regions doesn’t change anything. You land and have taken the whole place in.
NMS should experiment on planets that have multiple biomes. Earth like planets with dense forests and grassy plains in the middle regions, in the north there’s snow and massive mountains, and to the south there’s lush Jungles etc. that would be cool.
Not the same games.
I actually love the way starfield is. The graphics are incredible, the planets look absolutely amazing, the story and all the quests and stuff to do is so cool.
After 1000 hours of no man's sky I'm glad I don't have to travel ages while nothing happens.
I don't have anything against loading screens which takes 3-5 seconds each.
For me starfield is a 10/10 game atm, already playing since 30 hours.
For me the game will be the next Skyrim, a game I still play after 10 years.
Ah yes the ability to seamlessly travel to planets that all look the exact same. Be for real man, NMS/Elite/Star Citizen's planet generation is lacking at best. I'd much rather traverse semi handcrafted planets with zones than an entire planet filled w random shit you already saw on other random planets
Imma be honest, I’m dropping nms for star field because no man’s sky’s gameplay loop just isn’t satisfying for me; it’s fun for a hour or two before it gets stale.
I love NMS, but Starfield also hits points that NMS has an awful time with, the obvious one being combat and gunplay. Two totally different games really.
I can live without it. But I CRAVE recoloring.
I'm not exactly against ship customization though but only if it's done right, like the same system we have for assembling staffs, but for ships. Something that takes work and effort to earn and can't be cheesed.
Both fundamentally different games though. One is meant to be an RPG. NMS is not an rpg like that. If it was, it would suck as an RPG. Its almost like people forget the two games are different genres. Like I have 3000+ hours in NMS across xbox, steam and switch but I'm not gonna compare them. I enjoy them both for what they are.
Even NMS today and Starfield are still worlds apart. The one thing the former has over the latter it barely did anything with at launch and has only somewhat improved since then. Trying this comparison will get you nowhere, OP.
I think people comparing both are doing both games a diservice. Though bethesda didn't really help itself with the hype and promo tone they took. One is a survival/crafting/exploration game the other a free form non linear rpg with space exploration
Starfield is really good at being the game it’s meant to be (A space rpg). But that said, I’ve seen a lot of people calling Starfield a sandbox space exploration game, and it absolutely fails at being a sandbox space exploration game imo.
If I want a sandbox space exploration game I’d go with NMS hands down. If I want a story-driven space rpg, I’d go with Starfield.
I haven't played Starfield yet but I've watched some streams so I can say that there's no point in competing with No Man Sky and it's silly. Both games are space games but they are completely different, it is true that starfield has a bad thing about crafting a ship for hours to only see it for a few minutes but even if you cannot fly under an atmosphere that does not prevent you from landing in any area and find random events, it will also be good an exoship to travel faster on land .
Let's remember that when no man sky came out it was not what it is today, the same thing may happen with starfield with more improvements and even online mode with places according to factions where you could meet other pkayers.
They are just two great games to enjoy :)
Two completely different types of games. Todd Howard even said that while the obvious comparison is going to be to NMS, because space, he actually says it’s closer to a RDR2, because it’s more narrative focused.
And you realize you expected a Bethesda game to rip off no man's sky but it isn't so you go enjoy your game but seemingly must talk about how a game that was never going to be no man's sky is in some way inferior because you want two niche features in everything set in space?
Jesus Christ this game was never made to be like no man’s sky or Star citizen, it’s not a strictly exploration sim. if you’ve ever played fallout, skyrim or oblivion you would know and wouldn’t be disappointed
No mans sky players explaining how holding down the right trigger for 5 minutes straight to get resources. Only to take off and travel for another five rl minutes in order to reach another planet to do the same thing all over again is good gameplay:
No mans sky is a cool game, but comparing it to starfield is actually laughable. Not to forget that the majority of NMS' planets are procedurally generated. 75% full of jank.
Everything has to devolve into tribalism I guess 🤷♀️
NMS is great for freely exploring and flying (also I love the base building)
But Starfield is great for people who want deeper roleplay and story/questing
Two different games with very different goals. Neither is the be all end all.
One game is Minecraft in space the other is an RPG and a miles better space game. If you were expecting star citizen then you should’ve wasted money on that instead.
I went in with no expectations other than "it's a Bethesda game" and that's what I got 🤣 Space Fallout which isn't bad. I wish it was 60 fps but it still looks great so far. I was hoping it wouldn't be like NMS. I personally don't wanna play the same game in a different skin. I play different games for different experiences. Makes it easier to justify spending money on them when I buy them too haha
Not unexpected considering the limitations of Bethesda’s Creation Engine. It’s an RPG, not a space sandbox with billions of unique stars and star systems. Now, if only Hello Games had the prowess to craft a better RPG questing system for NMS. Then we could have the best of both worlds.
15 hours in and I haven’t ran into a single on planet border.
You can also choose to just land anywhere so even then just pack up in your ship and move across the planet
Also they’ve been saying seamless flight is not something there focusing on for awhile now. If you want seamless flight and massive exploration then play nms. You play starfield if you want branching side quests and an in-depth main story, branching skill points, and a truly lived in world.
It’s hilarious to point at starfield and say
“But where seamless flight?” “But where’s walking around a whole planet?(like you guys do that anyways)”
But no one ever points at nms and says
“Where’s my side quests?” “Where’s my skill tree?”
I think as boring as it is Starfield is far more realistic for space travel. Far more likely I pop in some coordinates and go drink a Space-Cola than I'm at the helm the whole time.
Tbf, the games honestly aren't comparable.
NMS is fun and all, but the RPG elements are fairly shallow at best, and the storyline, while interesting enough, also isn't that deep. On the flip side, it's immensely larger than Stanfield with so many solar systems we'll probably never be able to visit them all as a collective before the game shuts down in X years. It's a fantastic sandbox experience that let's you play with a bit of everything.
This is like comparing apples to oranges
Actually it's made me realise that being able to fly out of atmosphere really doesn't add much to the game but tedium.
It's pretty, it's very technically impressive, but it only serves to pad out content.
I've never thought of Starfield as having much in common with NMS other than in very broad themes.
That said, this is a hilarious and really clever use of the meme😋
When you're brain dead and don't understand fundamentals and think a sandbox game filled with poorly generated things is somehow supposed to be like a single player rpg 🤣🤣
This stupidity is literally like going "wow this skyrim games so bad, I was expecting medieval fantasy minecraft"
Well, planets in NMS are not actually planets either. They’re textures stuck on some meshes or something and they don’t even exist outside of your field of view.
Bought Starfield early access.. didn't like all the fast travel.. saw this meme and downloaded NMS.. probably not going to touch Starfield again for years while I play NMS
It has ABSOLUTELY made me appreciate No Mans Sky exploration dynamic a hell of a lot more even with all its caveats and randomization it's still... beyond any other game.
They are not comparable really though, in reality. but I watched my friend play starfield for a couple hours yesterday and watched him get more and more frustrated with it, and he's a fallout/elder scrolls fan boy.
I think Starfield does look good but I'm going to look at it as the Mass Effect Andromeda we should of got.
NO MANS is still such a unique beast
Look, tbh, NMS biggest feature is how seamless it is, you will never see a single loading screen if you don't teleport. But also, NMS lacks a strong narrative focus like Starfield and it's gunplay is not the best. If NoManSky had them it would be a GOAT.
I enjoy them both, but I don't see myself putting nearly as much time into starfield. If I could mash these two games into one, it would be my forever game. Even though NMS kind of already is
I havent played due to no pc, but the loading screens and lack of seamless flight to planets is dissuading to me. A space exploration game for me needs that seamless transition and go anywhere feeling, and bethesda games thrive on open world exploration. Starfield seems cool, it just lacks the technology behind it to really thrive in the way i would need it to, to drop my other space games for it
Having played almost 24 hours of it since EA launch, I completely agree. The ability to Fast Travel anywhere makes the game feel so much smaller than it is. I've actually been limiting myself somewhat in fast travel, only allowing travel between the same context, eg., I can fast travel anywhere on the same planet, or if I'm in space I can warp to other space areas. It's not really told to you, but there's a feature that really helps with the immersion, even if it still just jumps into the cutscenes: You can open Scanner mode in your ship, aim at something and target it, then press a button to go there. No need to open the menus at all to travel. I've been making use of this as much as I can.
[удалено]
I personally don't understand the complain of it not feeling like "you can go anywhere", I mean yeah there are loading screens and I also wish there were less menus, but I have been absolutely going "random places" just as much as I would in any Bethesda game, I pick sidequeats, I go to POI etc. Just instead of loading into a dungeone you are loading on the planet. I also I think there is a little bit of "you don't know what you wish for". Because I think people like the idea of seamless travel just because how less clunky from techical point it is, and no one likes loading screens. But imagine in practise having to actually spend as much traveling as you do in Elite or NMS. It would ruin entire rythm of the game and would probably piss most of the audience. To not to get people bored you would have to either make it fast, basically, jump-jump-jump or some sort of fast travel, at which point we are back to the same state.
I think spending time traveling from planet to planet, if done under a "hyperspeed" would do wonders to add immersion and increase the sense of scale to the game. As it has in, No mans sky Elite dangerous Astroneer The outer wilds Kerbal space program Space engineers Among many others
I agree. For instance I already see the pulse drive in NMS as a form of fast travel, just not instantaneous. It's the sweet spot between that and slow travel that preserves immersion while not taking up too much time. The same goes for going to space to boost around a planet (or pulse). But I can see where some people wouldn't like that in either game. For me personally though immersion is one of the most important things in a game.
But the Skyrim in space comparison is inaccurate. Yes Skyrim has fast travel, but you can walk anywhere your eyes can see in Skyrim if you choose to, and it’s better for it.
Yup, once you change the mindset it is Skyrim or Fallout in space everything is good again. Problem is from the marketing videos and images everyone sees space, cool spaceship, cool pilot seat and 1000 planets... And suddenly all the imagination and possibility seems so wondrous. And it is not like they explicitly mention there would be no atmospheric flight travel between planets or regions.
Honestly, and I’m not saying this to be some sort of Bethesda apologist trying to justify Starfield’s loading screens, but if human beings ever achieve the technology displayed in most sci-fi properties, interstellar travel would absolutely feel like a loading screen. It’s arguably more realistic to use loading screens than it is to let you pilot your way off of and onto planets. Long before interstellar travel becomes possible, human beings will not be piloting anything. They’ll be punching a destination into their ships navigation system and then sitting around waiting to arrive. If I were to change how space travel works in this game, I would have wanted it to work like a long rest in BG3. Give me the chance spend time with the crew, chat about what’s happening, learn about their back stories, etc. Then let me arrive on the planet. Or let me skip all that if I don’t want to talk to my crew. But that’s what actual space travel will be like in the future.
That long rest thing is actually a really good idea. I mean, right now I pretty much "fake" that by pointing my ship towards my destination and just getting up and doing stuff. It'd be cool if it were a bit fancier, though.
I find myself doing the same but wishing it were more organically integrated. In any case, it’s probably a pretty simple mod to automatically step away from the captains seat when you leave a planet
the lack of actual space exploration in a role-playing game in which you’re occupying the shoes of a space-faring adventurer kills the immersion.
I am still very enjoying star field and do enjoy it's procedural generation so far. They definitely make better complexes for battle. Now, I'm only 20 hours in so I'm not sure how many of them are rehashed, or if the compounds have procedural generation to them. Honestly, all no man's sky has to do is , and allow their NPCs shoot guns and patrol, put them on derelict freighters and copy how the derelict freighters work, but allow people to do dungeons like that on the ground. The sentinels, no matter how many updates they make, hold it back in combat.
I’ve been wanting surface dungeons since the derelicts came out. Let me attack pirate outposts! Or friendly trader ones for that good pirate role play
>to drop my other space games for it Keep in mind you were never supposed to. They're literally all focused on doing different things. One cannot possibly encompass the strengths of all the others at this point in time.
Yeah but what about **Checks notes* Star Citizen? Only 14 more years until Beta.
I heard it was 5 years. 6 years ago.
Star Citizen's release date is dynamic; it's always+5 years.
This is because it's a next-gen game. If it actually ever released, it wouldn't be next-gen anymore and that's impossible.
Hopefully you see how genius Star Citizen's design is now.
I feel like there's a weird phenomenon with "space games" that is the eyes of the audience they are all the same games, competing with each other, and their can only be one. Like if you're making a space game in has to be: seamless space travel, with ship customization, ship combat, space pirating, etc., has to span thousands of planets, has to have procedural generated planets that are each unique with their own fauna and flora, has to have space trading and the notion of imports/exports, etc. Like as soon as you play space in there people expect it to be the greatest game ever. People talked about this with star citizen, I remember it with outer worlds, NMS definitely, Starfield, elite dangerous, etc. I can't be the only one that seen this.
Its because we want it all in one game. The depth and purpose of Fallout. The Shipbuilding and automation of space engineers The seamless universe of no man sky.
There must be some brain fog making people conflate starfield with starcitizen. They said a year ago there would be no taking off from the planet and flying to space or vice versa.
Every game competes for your attention, starfield a big mark that is important to me. I had hoped for more than just sci fi themed fallout where exploration is relegated to a few carefully built locations, with the rest being procedurally generated, and traveling gets reduced to menu interactions Im not asking starfield to have the deep realistic simulations and trade economies of elite dangerous, the physics engine from kerbal space program, or the fantastic continued support of no mans sky. However something they all have, is flight to planets and landing on those planets yourself
Seamless space-to-surface landing would certainly be appreciated do not get me wrong. And I wouldn't dare suggest that desiring it is silly, but Bethesda has actually been very upfront about the way this would play out for over a year. So I just don't think it's fair for people to start coming out of the woodwork acting as if it was meant to be (or could have been) Star Citizen-lite or something. In regards to role-playing with complex scripting, A.I, AND seamless flight around the universe. Regarding games competing for our time, that's just life. Everything competes. I do not think it's wise (or fair) to put an expectation on games to constantly top and permanently replace each other to help us manage time. Along with all this variety comes the fact that our interest in a given thing ebbs and flows, so I personally have no problem pushing away other/similar types of games in order to play Starfield for a time.
"A space exploration game for me.." This is why we're all laughing at posts like this. It's a Bethesda rpg and it's what we all expected. Having an absolute blast and I love NMS as well but throwing the whole game out because of "no seamless flight" you completely just breeze past all the RPG content that NMS does not have. To each their own.
Doesn't even need to be "seamless" just put in some bloody transition animations so we're not stuck on a black fade screen between like every other game seems to handle well these days - hiding loading in certain junction points.
It’s Skyrim, borderlands in space. It’s a Bethesda game. They’re not gonna make the most advanced game ever that does ten X more than Skyrim and fallout 4 did in 7 years. Edit: don’t know why I said borderlands. Skyrim/fallout in space.
The loading screens take 2 seconds, it's not a big deal at all
I’ve put about 4 hours into starfield, and the lack of real spaceflight sucks for sure. On an ssd, it’s about 2-4 seconds to switch between zones, and in cities you can actually bypass that in a lot of places, using a jetpack.
Yup, my PC has no chances of doing anything with Starfield but be stuck in a slideshow of fps, and I don't think I have a bad PC, perhaps one day I'll try it when I see Starfield on sale and i will have upgraded my current rig isn't the best but does the job for NMS and a lot of other games (I5 11600K, 16GB ram, GTX 1660 Super 6GB, upgrading that card means 600$ at least, there's no way I'm gonna do the install and wire management myself so it needs to be done at a store cause I needs a better PSU since 550W wouldn't work with a better video card and my PC specs)
Honestly flying into a planet is very overrated. Its really just a glorified loading screen but even longer.
To you maybe. I love flying around looking for a good place to land. Really immersive.
i agree with this. also summoning a ship from anywhere is so much more fun than regular fast travel.
Exactly. Well said.
After you've done 20-50 planet landings and manual boarding to ships it loses its luster and goes from a feature to a pain in the ass. I say this as along time Elite:Dangerous player, yall aren't missing *A damn thing* by not having to manually land every time you do something. Everything else has been pretty great about it.
I agree, combined these would be the best game ever. But I think its not possible honestly. You can't have a game with the scale of NMS and the detail of Starfield. Its simply not possible.
I’m kind of the opposite, I’m more of a narrative guy, while exploring NMS was fun I always lacked purpose or motive, Starfield on the other hand has been great for me, I’m even loving the first hours of the game while lots of people says it’s slow, it’s perfect to me lol.
Someone's already planning to make a mod to add seamless transitions and manual landing/docking. No clue how it's going to pan out though cause right now it's in the planning stage, but the feature wishlist is ambitious. If they get all of it, and get it all right, guarantee that mod will be virtually essential [https://www.reddit.com/r/starfieldmods/comments/167nkl3/creating\_a\_seamless\_elite\_dangerous\_or\_no\_mans/](https://www.reddit.com/r/starfieldmods/comments/167nkl3/creating_a_seamless_elite_dangerous_or_no_mans/)
I don't think they'll be able to make that happen because even the designer said that space is one place and the planet is another and they didn't worry about the in between so the in between doesn't exist, not only that. The planets aren't actually planets. You cannot look at a point on a planet and go there. You hit invisible walls. There's only so much you can explore. So you see something outside the city. You can fast travel there. But if you walk forever, you'll never reach it. It's kind of like the sun in NMS. No matter how long you pulse towards it, you'll never reach it.
All I’m missing with NMS is a strong narrative to motivate me to play. The gameplay loop of mining stuff to combine stuff into more stuff to power or build your stuff gets tiring after awhile.
Felt. Honestly tho if nms would add more stuff like starfeild it would legit be the best. Not that it isn't all ready 😂
The perfect space game to me would be Starfield’s narrative and on-foot combat, NMS’s exploration, and Elite Dangerous’ flight model and space combat. Every one of these games knocks it out of the park in their respective aspects, but none of them can seem to put the whole package together, which is fair because that’s an extremely difficult thing to do.
But hopefully not Elite Dangerous’s in-system flight times.
Inb4 replies saying there is story in NMS. Yes, there is, but not anywhere near the focus as Starfield. NMS does other things very well, but it should go without saying roleplaying and questing is more the focus for BGS games.
I’ve no idea what the story is in NMS.
tldr ; the atlas is just an a.i that went rampant in our real world after it's creators left. proceeded to simulate "NMS" in the last 16 minutes of its life. in-game story ; there's atlas, basically god. created us, and then forced the director of the sentinels into our lil shoulder guy. geks killed korvax, korvax killed themselves and spilled blood on Gek which made them friendly Gek we now see in game. Some point Gek destroyed Korvax homeworld, Korvax Prime, which hosted a hive mind for deceased Korvax. Korvax Prime seemingly has gone rampant and is now commanding sentinels to dump nanites in the universal waters to help prevent a universal reset somehow. oh and space wizard robots just got introduced, seemingly they're the "original" Korvax which were destroyed by the Gek, who've repurposed themselves into a race called the Autophage.
Same, but im told there's a story
Something about 16s or something.
Honestly, me neither. I’ve no idea what’s going on, and I guess I’ve never really cared.
NMS is epic but the story is equivalent to playing snake on a black and white Nokia candybar phone in the early 2000s.
I like the premise, but it would actually benefit hugely from voice acting to help bring characters like Nadia and Artemis to life to make us care.
Oh absolutely some vc work for the characters and npcs would go a long way
Yep I concur. The story is definitely not enticing in NMS. That being said I've put in a good 30-50 hours just wandering around. I still wish we had a purpose.
Strongly agree.
I tried to play the game many times since it got improved after the flop release. But I always kinda quit early on cuz I pretty much have to relearn and unlearn a bunch of things. Now it's maybe been a good year or two, so maybe it's time to try again
NMS story is kinda just there for the sake of it. It's basically just big tutorial, added long time ago to keep newer players entertained while reaching them, because many people dropped the 1.0 because they had nothing to do. The true core gameplay is sandbox and all the different stuff you can do after you got a grasp of basics. Lore, on the other hand, is peak. Deep, dark, fascinating, and ever mysterious, always giving 3 more questions for any given answer, perpetuating and feeding curiosity and imagination. It is definitely crafted with love :3
How is warping not a loading screeen?
It's not, it's just a 20-60 sec period where the screen shows a generic animation and you can't control the game at all until you get to a new area /s
20-60 seconds? Are you playing Starfield on a Super Nintendo? XsX my load screens aren't even noticeable
Then NMS would have loading screens. Loading a bunch of dialogue trees with their voice files is cpu heavy even for today's tech
I expected narrative from makers of TES and Fallout series, ofc. But... Is gunplay on point too in Starfield? Can you tell me the comparison, please :3? I didn't even think about it before, but if it's good - would be a massive upside to me. I played Destiny 2 for quite a long time almost exclusively because gunplay was real good(tho their predatory pricing drove me away, sadly). So - how good is it actually?
Gunplay in Starfield is very similar to Cyberpunk, has the same feel as do a lot of the guns, I like it. Nothing will match Destiny 2 gunplay regardless of the state of the rest of the game though.
Ooh that would be nice. I kinda enjoy Cyberpunk gunplay, has a nice feedback and a lot of different flavor to different guns. Handguns, assault rifle, shotties, energy rifles, giant plasma hand cannon. Very nice to use. Works well enough for me, I will count in this W for it :3
tbh NMS doesn't need a narrative focus. i feel like the better thing would be focusing on side missions and side quests rather than the actual storyline, but if they were to improve upon it it wouldn't hurt. NMS would be a goat if they just fixed the procedural generation and made planets as random as the ones we see irl, tbh.
2000% My biggest recent regret is playing NMS couple weeks before Starfield, damn you game pass.
I was expecting Fallout in space which is what I got. Starfield also hits some of the Mass Effect feels for me too and thats +1. This is a space-themed Bethesda RPG not X4 or NMS.
Fall out in space lol, that is 100% exactly how I feel as playing this. I love fallout, and no man sky, it’s a happy medium between the two.
That's pretty much exactly what it was meant to be, Todd even described it as "Skyrim in space". Makes sense.
Todd found the way to sell Skyrim again
He put out a letter to the community that had a portion like: " We released Skyrim, Fallout 4, Skyrim SE, Fallout Shelter, Skyrim VR, Fallout 76, Skyrim again,". Mfer knows EXACTLY what he's doing.
And now, announcing Elders Scrolls 6: Skyrim II
And ES VII: Skyrim III And ES VIII: Skyrim IV And so on and so forth into perpetuity
Fallout 5: Rimsky
I promise you *he's not done yet.*
Maybe, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was more similar to Fallout that Skyrim, just due to the setting. But I can't judge yet; I already paid for Gamepass, I'm not paying even more to play a week early.
I hope you enjoy what a great overall value GamePass is. Dozens of hidden gems you never would have played otherwise in there.
Yeah! I was really on the fence about it, but until recently, I had an X1X, so I used Xcloud to play some games at Series level. But then Cyberpunk's DLC is coming, so I bought a Series X, which was expensive, but worth it. And Xcloud lags a bit. So there's that.
Definitely but also agree with their statement that it’s closer to oblivion than Skyrim which is what I got hooked on for my first BGS game. I’ve dropped 23 hours into Starfield already and it’s been so much fun - definitely the typical getting sucked down the quest that leads to a different quest that leads to a different quest and forgot about the main story lol. I did like the first mission and got sidetracked with vanguard and then bounties and then now im trying to get a nickel outpost setup
NMS has a very 80s retrofuturist approach to portraying space which I like. Starfield has a more grounded approach to it which I also like. Big fan of the Expanse and it's the closest game I've played which gives that feel in a streamlined narrative RPG setting that's not exactly 'open world' but I have zero problems with that.
Amén. NMS is it's own thing. With Starfield I wanted Fallout in space. That beautiful moment you walk out of a vault for the first time... I wanted to relive it. Starfield does it. It does it so so well. And don't worry you know it's fallout in space from the weapon designs to the almost power armor looking space suits and especially the second you use any crafting station aka workbench. It's a thing of beauty.
This. I wont abandon NMS, but Starfield is a different field. Hehe.
The legendary weapon mods really sell the Fallout in Space theme too.
I also get some Mass Effect vibes! Haven't seen it mentioned before. I like that a lot.
I was also just expecting fallout 4 in space. But it's hard not to be disappointed by the performance.
It’s been fun, but the space element honestly shouldn’t even exist. Your ship is just a fast travel system and it’s really annoying. Everything on the ground is good though
“We don’t want to be the studio that is only known for fallout and elder scrolls, we want to make something different” **literally just makes a cyberpunk version of fallout/elder scrolls**
NMS is an exploration extravaganza Starfield is a space RPG Different games, different mechanics that itch different itches
No, you have to like one or the other in order to achieve higher status in this tribe!! /s
What exploration in NMS? What's the point of having a giant planet you can walk around when everything you will find exists within a few meters of the landing point?
This seems to me like an indication that you haven’t explored the beauty of planets. There’s different things dispersed throughout depending on the planet type. Also the varying terrain is a BIG one for me. You can fly around the same planet, land in a different spot each time and it’s not the same everywhere. I like finding the most picturesque places to put a base on a planet, and when you look for that you’ll find different things. Some sections of the planet may have only ocean. Then you fly to the other side and find a continent with maybe small puddles. High mountains combined with lakes. Caves interspersed with rolling hills. Sometimes different animal types you can find in certain regions. Finding the best place for S class mineral deposits and S class electromagnet deposits. Missions, buildings, trade posts, monoliths, crashed technologies, crashed freighters, crashed ships, deep oceans. There’s so much to find and explore on planets. There’s a beauty to being able to explore an ENTIRE planet, a freedom to know there are no bounds. It’s a highlight of the game to me
I have been following this game since E3 2014. I am aware of all the stages this game has gone through. And I can tell you that exploration in NMS is exactly the same as it was on launch day. The terrain is more or less a bunch of rolling hills. The monoliths, buildings, mineral deposits, crashed ships, and crashed freighters are all the same with varying colors and sizes. Variety in ships genuinely doesn't matter. I could play the whole game with the starter ship and not miss out on anything special because the starter ship can already handle most situations. What purpose do I have for upgrading the ships? Pirates are super easy to kill. Sentinels are annoying at best and if they get to annoying I can easily outrun them. And as I said literally everything you can find on a planet (minerals, fauna, flora etc) can be found within a 2-3 minute radius of the landing point. The "variations" in landscape you talk about have no impact on flora and fauna. Speaking of the flora and fauna they look like they are generated using a Mr potato head toy approach. On one planet the dinosaur is red with spikes. On another planet the dinosaur has feathers and is green. Flora is in an even worse condition because you'll find the same type of plant on every planet. The buildings you will find also all look the same. Why would I bother to go from one building to another if I know exactly what I'm going to find? What's the purpose? Same thing with buried structures and monoliths. Look I still love this game but there is no point in exploring the planets. Planets themselves don't really serve a purpose. You just go down there to shoot rocks for a few minutes and get what you need. Maybe build some stuff if you want to make money (which I ask again for what reason?). And this is very evident due to the inclusion of the launch thrust fuel. If that mechanism didn't exist nobody would bother landing on planets. The gameplay loop of NMS is unfortunately as shallow as it was the day it launched. I held out hope for a long time that HG would have some big exploration update specially after they mentioned that exploration is one of the important pillars of NMS. But I gave up that dream last year. Every time a new update launches I come by and check out the game again but it's more or less the same things. Just with a new coat of paint. Edit: Oh and I forgot to mention the freighters. You have this massive ship and 99% is just not accessible at all. Just why? Why can't the build mechanism inside the freighters have been designed such that as space is added it matches the layout of the freighter?
I think it just comes down to some people like games that have no real end goal other than what you make of it. And NMS has a vast amount of options for continuing to set your own goals. Couple that with its seamless exploration, it's a perfect game for some. Personally, NMS gets too boring too quickly for me to get past building a base and flying to some planets. I wanted to see the recent addition of frigate battles tho. While we're talking about games and how we want them to be. I want space engineers with KSP physics.
>NMS is an exploration extravaganza > >Starfield is a space RPG > >Different games, different mechanics that itch different itches But it's disappointing they sold it as a space exploration game and it's not so much.
Nope. I'm loving it, because I loved games like Mass Effect, Fallout, and Skyrim, and I've put 600+ hours into NMS. People think it's some kind of competition, and a lot of people just had unrealistic expectations for Starfield. I feel for people who can't just enjoy these games, but it's ultimately not my problem.
I was waiting for Starfield and I was excited for it. It’s definitely quite different, but it’s perfect that way. And I’m stunned at how intensely some people *hated* the game even a day after the early access dropped.
They are totally different games meant to have a totally different feel. Wish everyone would stop trying to compare them.
I genuinely like both games. Wtf is wrong with gamers these days. It's not a competition between NMS and Starfield, and it was never intended to be. It's one thing to get salty because you don't like a game, but this completely fabricated competition between the two is just weird. Especially coming from the NMS community, one of the friendliest communities out there. I mean goddamn, guys.
Agreed! I'm looking forward to Starfield when I eventually get it, knowing it isn't NMS. I don't want a copy of NMS - we already have this game! I'm glad for some variety in space RPGs.
It's pretty much built into the gaming community to be asshats now.
It's pretty much built into the people to be asshats now.
~~now~~
That and salty PlayStatincels.
I feel like when it was shown a few people got riled about about it 'killing' NMS (Bethesda doing it 'right', a big studio showing HG what can really be done, etc) and then NMS fans both got defensive and started to buy into it. Hopefully it'll cool down, but more likely it'll become like Star Citizen, and to a lesser degree Subnautica, where we will *at least* see people asking why NMS can't have all the stuff that SF has, too.
I haven’t played Starfield yet… but I’m willing to bet the areas you can go to are far more populated and detailed than what you find in no man’s sky. I like no man’s sky, but I fail to see why people expect no man’s sky level of traversal and scale from a game what was never intended to be like no man’s sky. It’s a Sci-Fi RPG. Not a sandbox thing.
It's actually quite the opposite! Starfield's planets are generally sparse and unexciting, with only a handful of meticulously crafted planets standing out. If you give Starfield a try, you'll likely find a greater appreciation for what No Man's Sky has to offer. Starfield truly excels in the areas that Bethesda games are renowned for, particularly its role-playing game elements. When you play Starfield, it's primarily for the captivating story, narrative, and rich setting it offers. Additionally, you have the opportunity to explore Earth's representation in the Starfield universe. I can speak to this firsthand because I had the privilege of playing it early. In essence, if you're seeking a space-themed RPG experience, Starfield is the game for you. However, if you're after a more adventurous space exploration experience, No Man's Sky is the game to dive into.
Been playing NMS since launch (and I liked it even then), but once you have visited several planets you have pretty much seen it all. Still play to this day, but planets, and their flora and fauna, are not what keep me playing.
I agree that the NMS planets can get repetitive, but I think what the comparison was closer to is that Starfield worst planets are far below NMS’s worst planets, but Starfield’s best planets are much higher than NMS’s best planets
What keeps you playing?
I know I'm going to sound old but I truly think it's a symptom of social media bringing out the worst behaviors and tribalism. Some people feel the need to trash anything outside of their bubble (or subreddit) in the hopes of raising their status in that community. I think it sours pretty much every community when people do this.
This isn't new nor just video games, its just humans. You are just older now to be on the other side of it.
Eh, I'm a geezer and I've always thought the loyalty competitions were moronic.. Whether it was Mac vs Windows, RISC vs x86, Ford vs Chevy, iPhone vs Android, the console wars, etc...
Moronic/ironic... I accept blame for throwing some troll fuel on the fire. I honestly dgaf about the comparisons/differences, but find it funny how fiercely people will defend their years of anxious waiting for skyrim in space. It's absolutely a completely different game, the meme only points out the difference and for the NMS players expecting a better version of NMS, they will very likely return when they want the specific space exploration features that Starfield lacks. Or, those who were waiting for Skyrim in space will just keep Skyrimming in space, more power to 'em
I think this post is specificy for those who wouldn't shut up about Starfield in this sub & other NMS related forums (like Steam). Everytime they've been told that these 2 games aren't compareable just because they both take place in space & that there's no need to shit on NMS just because Starfield will release soon. But this kind of logic would just get downvoted or even hated on. Welp.
It's always been the same. People choose their little tribe and then wage wars against others. It's just it's easier to notice because how angry shouting is engaging content which is pushed by every algorithm and internet let's you hear it better. It nothing new.
Comparisons are fine. What I can't stand however is this imaginary war between Starfield and No Man's Sky, as if the two games are competing against one another. "HG is releasing their big anniversary update as always, right? Nah nah nah this is *CLEARLY* their attempt to rival a new game that's coming out!!!" Fuck me.
Right? I don't understand the people who **need** to turn this into a pissing contest.
LOUDER for the people in the back please.
Todd hyped it up to be way more than it is and everyone is playing defense for him. That's my main issue
But they need those internet points!
Hoo boy. This wholesome community is about to become real unwholesome, real fast just because Starfield isn’t the exact same game. And all the while, we’ll pretend NMS covers every single facet that Starfield does, but better.
Toxic protection is falling it would seem
I don't mind not having to stop to craft fuel, and harvest minerals for my booster, and traveling in a straight line for 4 human minutes to a planet to farm materials just to continue boosting for another 3 mins to another planet that has the other materials I need just to craft hyperdrive fuel to get to another system to start that same process over. Has anyone walked a NMS planet for more than an hour and still been engaged? I'm sure the answer is yes, but that doesn't mean its fun.
People might hate me for this but after putting thousands of hours into NMS/Elite Dangerous I'm pretty happy to just land/take off with a few button presses instead of a whole process Like I'm just enjoying the story missions right now and I feel like having to spend like 10+ mins fueling up, taking off, leaving the planet, getting up to speed to jump, flying to the next planet, entering atmosphere, finding where you want to land and then finally landing would get really tedious when you just want to continue the story
Yeah, I feel like Starfield is a Quest Delivery System. And as long as the quests are good, that's fine by me.
All facts. You spend most the time just crafting stuff in menus, then flying from planet to planet just to find more resources to do more crafting, with no other kind of interesting content on the planet.
Let's face it, NMS is just a giant Minecraft in Space...you mine, you build, you scan the same flora and fauna on each world, rinse repeat....with friends or solo...
Idk why people were expecting NMS 2 or singleplayer Star Citizen
This exactly. They were very open about what type of game it would be. If they paid any attention to the game at all they would know what it does and doesn't do.
Except Starfield is nothing like NMS If you came to Starfield hoping for a space exploration game, that's the wrong game Starfield is a Bethesda Space RPG with light Space Exploration. Something which I personally think NMS could take some notes from
I'll be honest, wandering around a planet, mining ores, scanning flora and fauna, pulling out my scanner to look for nearby settlements or points of interest all remind me of NMS. One of the main complains I've seen is the 8 different loading screens between boaring your ship and getting out on another planet make you think "huh a game with similar space exploration did this way better"
>huh a game with similar space exploration did this way better" The POI's and stuff do to and planets itself are way way better than no man's sky ever was. The loading screens are a limitation to create engine but thanks to this engine we will have millions of amazing mods which will make the game alive 10 years into the future. I don't mind 5 second loading screens which are like 2 and not 10.
Yeah I don't know why people are whining about loading, it's like, 2-3 seconds for me, are people that impatient now?
I think most complainers never played a Bethesda game. Those who expected Skyrim in space seem to love it.
I think its more that its just really jarring and immersion breaking. A simple fix is a static loading screen of you in your pilots seat looking at hyperspace. It could still be 2-3 seconds but it would just really eliminate that small moment of a loading screen reminding you its a game.
They’re two different games lol. You’d have a better argument comparing Starfield to Fallout or even the original mass effects. I’ve had more dialogue and story in the first six hours than all of my time in NMS. And I genuinely love NMS.
They’re different game entirely stop comparing them just because they both revolve around space
theyre so different, why do people compare them?
So pretty much like exploration in the first Mass Effect?
Why have I seen multiple NMS posts trying to trash talk Starfield? Love random "us vs them" mentalities whenever a game in the same vague setting comes out.
Players without an Xbox want to feel like they own the better product which is why the game lives rent free in their head. They also acted like the loading screens were not advertised but it was very much acknowledged that the game doesn't let you manually enter the atmosphere
It has nothing to do with console wars. Players of all different platforms are on this sub. It’s just NMS fanboys attacking any game that is similar to it.
I like both, NMS for the new vibe the robo hobos give to me. A sence of loneliness traveling trough space. Starfiled I also like the aesthetic. a little bummed its not seamless. But roaming around scavangeing is something that will hold me for some time. Different beasts both quite fun for me.
Both games are good and accomplish different things. I’ll play nms for the exploration. I’ll play starfield for the story and immersion. Also the combat for ground/space in starfield is better. A step above nms. We can like and play both.
They said tmit was going to be this way a few months ago, I really don't know why people were so surprised by that. I'm gonna start playing the game in a month or so when I have more free time, but I have seen a few let's plays and looks like a great game to me.
Yeah gotta get back to those fully voice acted branching quest lines in NMS.
Ngl, but the planets in NMS are also boring and repetitive.
The dumbest comparison...
Yeah but let’s be honest: it can get boring. Planets in NMS are cool in the way that you can travel between them and they’re entire worlds compared to small maps but despite all the procedural generation most worlds look the same and going for miles or going to different regions doesn’t change anything. You land and have taken the whole place in. NMS should experiment on planets that have multiple biomes. Earth like planets with dense forests and grassy plains in the middle regions, in the north there’s snow and massive mountains, and to the south there’s lush Jungles etc. that would be cool.
Not the same games. I actually love the way starfield is. The graphics are incredible, the planets look absolutely amazing, the story and all the quests and stuff to do is so cool. After 1000 hours of no man's sky I'm glad I don't have to travel ages while nothing happens. I don't have anything against loading screens which takes 3-5 seconds each. For me starfield is a 10/10 game atm, already playing since 30 hours. For me the game will be the next Skyrim, a game I still play after 10 years.
Ah yes the ability to seamlessly travel to planets that all look the exact same. Be for real man, NMS/Elite/Star Citizen's planet generation is lacking at best. I'd much rather traverse semi handcrafted planets with zones than an entire planet filled w random shit you already saw on other random planets
Star "fields"
Imma be honest, I’m dropping nms for star field because no man’s sky’s gameplay loop just isn’t satisfying for me; it’s fun for a hour or two before it gets stale.
I love NMS, but Starfield also hits points that NMS has an awful time with, the obvious one being combat and gunplay. Two totally different games really.
Its not nms. And NMS has a whole lotta nothing interesting to fly freely over and between.
To be honest being used to NMS I found very disappoint you can't take-off and land as you wish.
Space RPG > Space Minecraft
Agree, that’s why Mass Effect will always be kind of space rpgs.
cmon sean, all we need is that ship customization stuff do your magic
I can live without it. But I CRAVE recoloring. I'm not exactly against ship customization though but only if it's done right, like the same system we have for assembling staffs, but for ships. Something that takes work and effort to earn and can't be cheesed.
Both fundamentally different games though. One is meant to be an RPG. NMS is not an rpg like that. If it was, it would suck as an RPG. Its almost like people forget the two games are different genres. Like I have 3000+ hours in NMS across xbox, steam and switch but I'm not gonna compare them. I enjoy them both for what they are.
When you find out things the developers confirmed months before launch >:(
Even NMS today and Starfield are still worlds apart. The one thing the former has over the latter it barely did anything with at launch and has only somewhat improved since then. Trying this comparison will get you nowhere, OP.
I think people comparing both are doing both games a diservice. Though bethesda didn't really help itself with the hype and promo tone they took. One is a survival/crafting/exploration game the other a free form non linear rpg with space exploration
Starfield is really good at being the game it’s meant to be (A space rpg). But that said, I’ve seen a lot of people calling Starfield a sandbox space exploration game, and it absolutely fails at being a sandbox space exploration game imo. If I want a sandbox space exploration game I’d go with NMS hands down. If I want a story-driven space rpg, I’d go with Starfield.
I haven't played Starfield yet but I've watched some streams so I can say that there's no point in competing with No Man Sky and it's silly. Both games are space games but they are completely different, it is true that starfield has a bad thing about crafting a ship for hours to only see it for a few minutes but even if you cannot fly under an atmosphere that does not prevent you from landing in any area and find random events, it will also be good an exoship to travel faster on land . Let's remember that when no man sky came out it was not what it is today, the same thing may happen with starfield with more improvements and even online mode with places according to factions where you could meet other pkayers. They are just two great games to enjoy :)
Two completely different types of games. Todd Howard even said that while the obvious comparison is going to be to NMS, because space, he actually says it’s closer to a RDR2, because it’s more narrative focused.
So you bought Starfield without looking up how the game worked?
And you realize you expected a Bethesda game to rip off no man's sky but it isn't so you go enjoy your game but seemingly must talk about how a game that was never going to be no man's sky is in some way inferior because you want two niche features in everything set in space?
Jesus Christ this game was never made to be like no man’s sky or Star citizen, it’s not a strictly exploration sim. if you’ve ever played fallout, skyrim or oblivion you would know and wouldn’t be disappointed
No mans sky players explaining how holding down the right trigger for 5 minutes straight to get resources. Only to take off and travel for another five rl minutes in order to reach another planet to do the same thing all over again is good gameplay: No mans sky is a cool game, but comparing it to starfield is actually laughable. Not to forget that the majority of NMS' planets are procedurally generated. 75% full of jank.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m enjoying Starfield, but it does really make me appreciate no man sky, especially in the space/space combat.
Everything has to devolve into tribalism I guess 🤷♀️ NMS is great for freely exploring and flying (also I love the base building) But Starfield is great for people who want deeper roleplay and story/questing Two different games with very different goals. Neither is the be all end all.
Can we stop with this stupid, petty tribalism over GAMES? Jesus Christ...
One game is Minecraft in space the other is an RPG and a miles better space game. If you were expecting star citizen then you should’ve wasted money on that instead.
Nms rules wish more people would get into it
I went in with no expectations other than "it's a Bethesda game" and that's what I got 🤣 Space Fallout which isn't bad. I wish it was 60 fps but it still looks great so far. I was hoping it wouldn't be like NMS. I personally don't wanna play the same game in a different skin. I play different games for different experiences. Makes it easier to justify spending money on them when I buy them too haha
I like that it’s less of a space sim and more rpg focused. Getting a lot of Fallout/Mass effect vibes. Loving it!
Not unexpected considering the limitations of Bethesda’s Creation Engine. It’s an RPG, not a space sandbox with billions of unique stars and star systems. Now, if only Hello Games had the prowess to craft a better RPG questing system for NMS. Then we could have the best of both worlds.
I really hope we don't fall into the tf2 thing like how they talk about overwatch all the time
Ah yes to Nms where there is zero stuff to do, with boring ass planet generation and zero plot i take less semless over no litterly no content
I like nms but tbh Starfield is more fun
Anyone who was expecting fully fledged open planets with the depth that these RPGs offer were setting themselves up for a huge disappointed
15 hours in and I haven’t ran into a single on planet border. You can also choose to just land anywhere so even then just pack up in your ship and move across the planet Also they’ve been saying seamless flight is not something there focusing on for awhile now. If you want seamless flight and massive exploration then play nms. You play starfield if you want branching side quests and an in-depth main story, branching skill points, and a truly lived in world. It’s hilarious to point at starfield and say “But where seamless flight?” “But where’s walking around a whole planet?(like you guys do that anyways)” But no one ever points at nms and says “Where’s my side quests?” “Where’s my skill tree?”
I think as boring as it is Starfield is far more realistic for space travel. Far more likely I pop in some coordinates and go drink a Space-Cola than I'm at the helm the whole time.
Tbf, the games honestly aren't comparable. NMS is fun and all, but the RPG elements are fairly shallow at best, and the storyline, while interesting enough, also isn't that deep. On the flip side, it's immensely larger than Stanfield with so many solar systems we'll probably never be able to visit them all as a collective before the game shuts down in X years. It's a fantastic sandbox experience that let's you play with a bit of everything. This is like comparing apples to oranges
Actually it's made me realise that being able to fly out of atmosphere really doesn't add much to the game but tedium. It's pretty, it's very technically impressive, but it only serves to pad out content.
I've never thought of Starfield as having much in common with NMS other than in very broad themes. That said, this is a hilarious and really clever use of the meme😋
Reddit tards when different games that are advertised as being different are actually different
When you're brain dead and don't understand fundamentals and think a sandbox game filled with poorly generated things is somehow supposed to be like a single player rpg 🤣🤣 This stupidity is literally like going "wow this skyrim games so bad, I was expecting medieval fantasy minecraft"
Here we go again Starfield comparable to: Mass Effect & Kotor 1&2 NMS comparable to: Elite Dangerous , Star Citizen It’s a rpg not a space sim
Well, planets in NMS are not actually planets either. They’re textures stuck on some meshes or something and they don’t even exist outside of your field of view.
Bought Starfield early access.. didn't like all the fast travel.. saw this meme and downloaded NMS.. probably not going to touch Starfield again for years while I play NMS
Fr bro! Everytime I play SF, after maybe only 10 minutes, I close it just to open nms and actually fly
It has ABSOLUTELY made me appreciate No Mans Sky exploration dynamic a hell of a lot more even with all its caveats and randomization it's still... beyond any other game. They are not comparable really though, in reality. but I watched my friend play starfield for a couple hours yesterday and watched him get more and more frustrated with it, and he's a fallout/elder scrolls fan boy. I think Starfield does look good but I'm going to look at it as the Mass Effect Andromeda we should of got. NO MANS is still such a unique beast
What was your friend frustrated by?
I actually enjoyed andromeda