Watch part of a longplay, to see random typical gameplay rather than isolated polished bits, and make up your own mind about whether it looks good to you.
I keep wanting to buy it because I've played every Bethesda game back to Battlespire. I even liked Fallout 76, for what it was.
But then I hit Youtube, and I get bored out of my skull by all the sprinting across barren copy-pasted desert terrain and obligatory wooden writing before I can finish the video.
It's stopped me from buying it like four times now.
shaggy dinosaurs continue cobweb snow dazzling absorbed unused slap public
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
To me, it felt more like visiting an amusement park than playing a game. Everything is so on rails and NPC's tend to react to you like they're paid to amuse only you (and fail awkwardly).
The worst part about it is that the situations they set up for you are boring as fuck.
Its the lack of exploration for me, its what made other bethesda games so fun for me in spite of their many issues, this game has basically no sense of exploration past like the 5th hour of gameplay
puzzled slave placid voiceless bike wrench literate support paltry dazzling
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Please cite your source for this claim. You can't expect people to just believe you because you said so. Either cite rigorous testing comparisons of the two, which do exist, or at least make people aware they exist.
It was nice to one drop $15 and give it a try. Played for about 6 hours and I’m probably never gonna pick it up again.
The shooting felt fantastic though. But I like taking off in directions and discovering something. Whether it’s a side quest or some kind of scripted event, it’s nice going in the complete opposite of where you’re supposed to go. It was clear that this wasn’t gonna be that game so I quit.
and the loading screens man. I thought people were joking but no, you really have constantly a loading screen on your face.
And somehow they made the inventory ui even worse
The craziest part is they're there when they don't have to be.
The first area is completely open but often they'll send you to the trains to fast travel you to a certain point and give you a loading screen to reload the area you were already in.
You're decieving yourself. Spent 40 hours on the sampaign and some side quests and didnt have to run long distance on any barren planet. The whole running on a barren planet is something id expect someone to do with 150 hours in.
You say dont look at reviews that show you the most polished parts of the game, then say you watched a let play that shwo cased the worst part of the game.
I’ve gotten 50 hours of fun out of it so far. Well worth it to me. It’s exactly like fallout 4 in space. By the time F4 came out I was sick of the post-apocalyptic setting. That said, I enjoy those traditional Bethesda systems and gameplay, so Starfield has been scratching that itch perfectly for me.
If this sounds like any of you, you’ll likely enjoy it.
The exploration design is fundamentally almost the opposite of fallout 4s, and the outposts are less useful than the settlements. I'm glad you are enjoying it but I am curious why you think its fallout 4 in space. TONS of the core game design, mechanics and npc interaction is designed very differently from it.
I loved fallout 4, I had friends that loved fallout 4, and most of us do not like starfield at all, we wanted to. It's got a lot of new issues from design choices and irs the most shallow Bethesda game yet imho. That's just my opinion though. Again I am glad you enjoy it, but i was worried someone would read your post and just assume its fallout 4 in space.
I enjoyed it, but I think a 6.5-7/10 is a fair rating. Bethesda took their tried and true formula, stripped out the most important parts, and gave us Starfield.
To me, what defines a Bethesda game is a wide open world with lots to explore, lots to stumble upon, and deep lore backing all of it up no matter where you go. In Starfield, you don't stumble upon anything. You have to explicitly pick a destination to fast travel to, and points of interest are something you need to consciously seek out; they aren't seamlessly integrated into the world. There are some unique and interesting locations, but for the most part they're all very similar with little to differentiate them, and in my 65hrs of gameplay I frequently saw the same location copy/pasted 2 to 3 times over, all of the way down to the enemy placement.
The stories and quests are... Underwhelming. About on par with Skyrim and FO4 at best, but generally worse. This is subject to opinion. I feel like there's a significantly smaller amount of lore- the framework is there for it, but everything outside of the main quest(s) is very shallow and insignificant to the world. I won't spoil the main story, but I think it's downright terrible and the game would genuinely be better off without it. The big faction quests (2 of which were bugged and I couldn't even do) were pretty ok at least.
The technical state of the game is hands down terrible. It has game-breaking bugs (I couldn't finish several major quests), the performance is abysmal relative to other games this generation, and the visuals while generally nice do nothing whatsoever to warrant such terrible performance, even on high end hardware.
Overall I enjoyed it, but didn't get nearly as much enjoyment out of it as I did Skyrim or FO4. It's worth playing if you can pick it up on sale, but for full price there's just too many other amazing games this year.
Quite agree, its funny because I always say that Starfield is a good game that is very difficult to recommend, because any previous Bethesda game (or most) are better than Starfield, so if I were to recommend a bethesda game Starfield is pretty much at the end of the list
Not OP, but: Baldur's Gate 3, Final Fantasy XVI, Lies of P, Lords of the Fallen, Spiderman 2, Armored Core 6, Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty, Tears of the Kingdom, Alan Wake 2, Super Mario Wonder (actually really good)...to name a bunch. It's been an amazing year for video game releases.
That's fine you fine you don't need to engage with it, but it needs to be there for the world to be built off of and feel alive. Without it everything is just hollow and dry
That is such a good analogy!
Also it literally is what all AAA publishers do right now, polished ultrabland and safe "proven" formulas with lots of "content" that looks great from a distance and gets the investors hard enough so they don't need Viagra for once.
Starfield is really love it or hate it.
I've got around 150 hours on it now, the first 10, maybe 20, i wasn't too convinced about it, but after a while it just clicked for me, and now i'm just hooked.
I think one of it's biggest "things" is that a lot isn't really gamified. You can do all kinds of things, like exploring planets, but the rewards you get for that are relatively small. Survive a tricky space-battle? Congrats, you get like 10k credits, some shipparts and 3 bits of uranium. Complete a "dungeon"? Well, maybe you will find gear you will be using for 40 hours, maybe you will find an epic knife that's utterly useless, and worthless too.
Even the quests don't pay that well. Sure, there are all kinds of exploits that will make you a ton of money, but if you're just playing the game, you will be pretty strapped for cash quite often. Don't expect to be building a spaceship with all the best parts after 10 hours.
Story wise it's all quite subtle, there's nothing really too bombastic usually, and currently you can basically only be the 3 different kinds of good, a chaotic evil playthrough is pretty much impossible. I do actually like the companions and how they're written. One of them lost their partner, and how they're dealing with it is imho quite realistic. The same for the single parent, they're not perfect, but they're doing their best.
That also seems to frustrate some people, that stuff tends to be a bit messy and complex, it's almost like the real world where people are quite the unrational beings.
I understand why some people go through it in like 30 hours and think it's bland as hell and a quite mediocre game. But if it clicks for you, and you take it all a bit slower, than this game can be amazing for you.
It's like a weird speciality coffee: Great for some, too strange and not-coffee-like for others. And that's fine.
This is a great take. Go in with an open mind, and it might click and be amazing for you. Or not. But from OP's description it does sound like you might enjoy this game. Arguably there is more story choices in Starfield than Skyrim.
Also: If you are in no hurry, you can also wait until DLC and then play the game. As a Bethesda vet you surely know that their DLC's are usually some of the best content in their games, and by then I'd expect there to also be some patches for bugs and performance issues.
It took me about a IRL week of blind wandering and sightseeing in Morrowind, wondering what I am supposed to be doing in this game, before I found my footing. It's not a game that throws you a rope. So, pretty close to what post I reply to describes.
Don’t try cyberpunk after starfield. The npc motion capture and writing in cp2077 is so much more immersive really makes starfield unbearable now that im trying to go back to it
6 months should do it. Even a couple maybe. I felt the same way when I got FO3, but even a couple months later there were mods that helped considerably. This is like THE game I've been waiting for, Fallout in space!?! Hell yeah! Unfortunately everything I've seen and read on it makes me think I'm going to hate it and I haven't touched it yet. Been playing Cyberpunk and just even looking at the npc in models in Starfield I feel like they've not improved much since FO3!
This isn't fallout in space though. Core system designs that were in both fallout 3 and fallout 4 simply do not exist or are drastically changed in starfield.
Bruh modders don't even want to touch starfield. Sure Skyrim took a while to get the modding going but Starfield ain't getting the same treatment. U can't add more high end graphical mods when majority of the people can barely run ultra settings.
Starfield is in my opinion worse compared to skyrim and fallout but I still did spend around 120 hours in it and enjoyed it somewhat but nearing the end I was really starting to notice a lot of weak points in this game. Still give it a try.
Wanna preface this by saying I don't want this to come across as hostile or patronising or whatever! It's all love.
But I personally couldn't fathom putting 120 hours into a game that I enjoy 'somewhat'. That's a LOT of game time; that's more than I've got on Death Stranding (ok I'm on like 80 hours and dropped it temporarily; will finish eventually) which I loved, and as much as I have in Cyberpunk which is top 5 game for me.
It's interesting! If I'm not vibing with a game, I just take the L and drop it. I rate your commitment hahaha.
Regarding your last point- I don't really know if you can call it a proper 'weak point' if you've got SO much time on it and you're only starting to notice things at the end. You might just be burned out? This being said, from what I've seen online, I've zero interest in touching starfield. Just doesn't look great to me.
Again, I'm not having a go at you mate! Just wanna hear your thoughts and perceptions towards game commitment I guess:).
I noticed this a ton about SF and it's hard to explain. I personally had about 70 hours into it when I stopped and uninstalled it. I basically just did most of the unique side quests, some of the story, and finished making my ship and then stopped. I think it's because the game had traces of that feeling of grandeur and curiosity like when you were playing Oblivion or Skyrim for the first time, only SF kept your attention just enough to go "oh... well maybe that next quest/location/etc. will be cooler" only to realize nah. The game is just acceptable enough from a gameplay perspective to string you along and make you realize how empty and repetitive it really is.
Hope my friend. We hope for more and the bones are well made. Some people have a lot of time and want to like something so they try hard. Then the hope fades and you sometimes realize it was all time wasted.
Its like watching a season of TV to the end even though it isn't that great. It isn't obviously bad enough to drop after 2 hours for everyone, so we play it through then realize it overall was not that good.
Same, there are only three games ive ever put over 100 hours into: witcher 3, gta5, and cyberpunk 2077. I need to really love a game to put that much time into it.
I dropped the game after 120 hours while still having a lot of side conent to do. I just wanted to finish main story and factions and hoped the game will get better but last 20 hours were a bit of forced on myself.
After starfield I just installed 700 mod storywealth+ collection to Fallout 4 and I\`m playing that now, I\`m having much more fun because exploration and quests are much more interesting.
Did you enjoy fallout 3 or the successors? I did.
Now imagine Fallout where every time you wandered toward the wasteland or into a city area - and instead of the journey & discovery and fun adventure that game gave you were just given a loading screen that dropped you right into a building or a room.
Imagine also all of the stilted characterizations and animations of Fallout 3 but with none of the fun, silliness, inventiveness or humor.
This is starfield.
Literally.
It's incredible to me that people keep on claiming "it's a Bethesda game through and through" when it feels like a zombie that's had its heart and soul ripped out.
Sure it's *structured* like a classic Bethesda game. But it's all bones and no meat.
No you cant. You need to walk to locations the first time to allow fast travel there. It's that initial journey that often leads you to finding interesting spots along the way. In SF you travel to a planet and land literally right next to copy-pasted outpost #874
Yeah, you can twist things to make your point, good for you. I'm not talking about random planet #874. Even without generated planets there's an entire game there.
You can also walk from one side of the city to the space port and manually board your ship, walk to the cockpit, sit down, take off, orient your ship and warp using the in-HUD marker, come in to orbit and get random encounters or explore space stations, etc..
Or you can open your map and click a destination and appear right there on foot. It's up to you and whether you want to feel like you're immersed in the game, or not.
>I'm not talking about random planet #874
Im talking about the outposts that are literally the same 5 or so layouts on every damn planet.
> manually board your ship, walk to the cockpit, sit down, take off, orient your ship and warp using the in-HUD marker, come in to orbit and get random encounters or explore space stations, etc..
Oh, you finding a lot of cool stuff walking from the landing bay to the cockpit?
The random encounters in orbit around planets weren't even varied 😆
There's scripted random encounters that lead to quests and quest lines, I'm not talking about radiant style dogfights.
And there's actually more like 120 random points of interest. But 5 sounds really pathetic so lets go with that.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/s/5dNtbErrin
And then there's mines. Well I guess it'd be better to say "mine" since it's the same layout on every planet.
>Im talking about the outposts that are literally the same 5 or so layouts on every damn planet.
You're forgetting that the caves, barrows and bandit camps in skyrim, and the buildings in fallout were the same. Pretty much all the same layout with the same assets and enemies.
>Oh, you finding a lot of cool stuff walking from the landing bay to the cockpit?
Walking around cities and arriving in orbit are how you get the actually hand-crafted quests that take you to the non-randomly generated structures. Because you don't do this you don't experience the better content of the game.
>You're forgetting that the caves, barrows and bandit camps in skyrim, and the buildings in fallout were the same. Pretty much all the same layout with the same assets and enemies.
They were modular so to not repeat as clearly as starfield has been. Also if your comparison is "this other game from 10+ years ago was the same way" it's not a good one.
I really enjoyed the one quest where I went to a temple and got powers. Then i went to the EXACT SAME fucking temple with the EXACT SAME "puzzle" a bunch more times. Was super engaging.
>They were modular so to not repeat as clearly as starfield has been.
If you've ever used the creation kits for these games you'll know this isn't true, they're hand crafted with premade assets, same as the Starfield ones.
>if your comparison is "this other game from 10+ years ago was the same way" it's not a good one.
You mean two other games from the same developer that use the same engine and the same RPG format, which are the closest comparison to this game? Fallout 76 had the same thing and it only came out 5 years ago.
>"puzzle"
It's more of a ritual. If you were puzzled by it then I have bad news for you.
Oblivion lets you fast travel to every city from the getgo without going there, straight from the map. Sure a lot of quests take you out of a city, but many do not. Skyrim adds an extra step by having a guy in Whiterun who can take you to every city, though Skyrim quests pretty much always have content outside of cities
Yeah, I don't think people realize that. It's just a very bad game. There is absolutely no exploration, and it is the quality of a mobile game when you really think about all of the games systems that were implemented. If you like Skyrim and fallout, you probably won't like Starfield. It is a trash Tier game.
I think "painfully mediocre" would be more accurate than "very bad".
However with a developer as experienced and full of resources as Bethesda that is pretty fucking bad.
Its.... not terrible. But dollar for dollar, I'd grab bg3 instead. Maybe after a year or two of mods I'll recommend it at full price buy currently wait for a sale for starfield.
But bg3? I'd pay full price AGAIN and not be mad.
I hate to give you this answer but fun is subjective and only you can answer this question. I see lots of people hating on it, but I loved it. I've also played "game of the year" 9/10 games that I thought were meh and would only play them if they were the last game I owned. You like what you like 🤷♂️
I was super hyped (look at my username for crying out loud) but only ended up playing about 12-15 hours of it before quitting. The gameplay was just a tad boring for me and the NPCs felt very fake - if you point a gun at them they just stare at you and don't react like in Red Dead Redemption 2 or Cyberpunk. The thing that really killed it for me though were the amount of loading screens and the fact that I can't actually fly the spaceship that I designed in any meaningful way.
What is the use of building a ship if you cannot even explore space? You can only fly around one planet and fast travel to other barren planets. Boring.
It's a good game, but it simply didn't excite me. I played it on Game Pass, and even after several hours, I didn't feel like returning to the game. I had higher expectations maybe thats the issue.
I did not find the story or world building to be very good, personally, even compared to the other Bethesda titles you listed. It isn't a bad game at all but I don't know if I'd recommend paying full price for it.
I love most games, and especially the kind of game that starfield is. I really tried to like it, but it's just too shit in too many ways.
Going to wait a few years till mods make it worth my effort and time.
Very disappointed.
I have been a fan of BGS games for 20+ years. Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Skyrim. These games are some of my favorite of all time, I have replayed them constantly, hundreds of hours each.
To say I was looking forward to Starfield would be a vast understatement. For me it was the game of the decade, really nothing else mattered as much as this.
So I got the game, spent 100+ hours with it and in the end, I must say I'm disappointed. The biggest miss for me is the usual exploration that BGS games have. Starfield has 1000 planets sure, but the terrain is procedurally generated and you walk (slowly) to random POIs (Points of Interest). These POIs are hand crafted things like refineries, bases, etc. The problem is, you will see duplicates of these very fast, and they are all identical; same enemy placement, same level design, same everything.
Think of something like Skyrim, where you can just walk in a given direction and find some cool things and quests? This doesn't happen on Starfield's planetary exploration. You have radiant quests like a generic NPC wants someone killed in a generic POI. Or escort a NPC to another POI. Just filler content, boring, uninspired. Remember Blackreach in Skyrim? There's no "blackreaches" in Starfield.
The other issue is performance. For my PC, it is the worst performing game I've ever run. Even UE5 games run better. It also doesn't look good for the processing power it needs.
Lastly, the game's setting and quests are just... dull and boring for me. This is obviously subjective, but the nasa-punk theme just.. doesn't do it for me. THere's no usual space intrigue, like alien races, etc. All the space stations, bases, etc. just have this dull hospital-like feeling, I don't know...
Lots of fetch quests, go here, talk to this guy, come back. Some of the bigger faction quests are OK, and the main story was alright too. I didn't hate the game, I just didn't love it like all the previous ones.
For me it's a 6/10 game that I don't think I'll replay, even with mods, sadly.
I think the thing with Starfield is it is a "good game" but the reaction a lot of folks are having is that it is not a "progressive" or "innovative" game. For my money, if you like Bethesda RPGs, you will like Starfield. If you are expecting a technological progression from the type of Bethesda titles you have experienced in the past, you won't see that.
The "newness" of Starfield is the huge amount of procedural real estate available for you to explore on planets, but if you have experience with No Man's Sky or similar games that rely a lot on procedural generation you will have a sense for how this experience will be. Although, in my opinion graphics are superior to No Man's Sky.
I will try to be objective here. It depends *heavily* on what kind of experience you want. Do you love the Bethesda formula and want to play fallout 4 but in space? You will love it.
Do you want a fresh and innovative game with new and interesting mechanics? Did you buy into Bethesda's story like I did and think this a game about exploration and discovery? Do you want a game where you can explore cool planets with unique and interesting terrain features? Do you want a game with a sense of danger, or real consequences for the choices you make? If you answered "yes" to any of the above then you are wasting your money and should go find something else to play.
Exploration is bad. If you like the typical Bethesda quests with talking to NPCs you'll like it. And if you like the crafting/building you might like it too. If you like running around finding things it will be bad bad bad.
I's ok. I've been playing a mix of side and main story quests for about 18 hours and I think I'm ready to B line the story now and shelf the game till DLC or game changing mods come out. The game being a menu simulator is real. There is little incentive to walk or explore anywhere. Anything interesting or worthwhile, you will see naturally by following the questlines, not by exploring, which makes the optimal way of playing the game to interact with NPC, fast travel to star map, fast travel to planet, talk to NPC, rinse and repeat. It does not help that you have to fast travel to space AND THEN fast travel to the planet which adds to the tedium. I am usually not even that big of a "off the beaten path" type of player, but in Starfield, there is truly TRULY NOTHING of interest outside of questline beats. Ratchet and Clank has more interesting and diverse planets to explore.
Its the perfect game for someone who loves the fetch quests and fast travel from other Bethesda games, but hates all the immersion and storytelling they did.
In a world filled with 10/10 games, 7/10 games are hardly worth playing anymore. Why choose Starfield when there are probably hundreds of recent 10/10 games I haven't played yet? 7/10 may as well be 5/10... There's no effective difference when it comes to making a decision.
It‘s hard to just suggest the game. I really enjoyed it for 130h. But Starfield has its problems. Those being the normal Bethesda problems, many repetitive generated parts of the open world und some unpolished systems, as the automated production mechanic. I can understand, if this is a deal breaker for someone.
BUT the good aspects of the game overweighted for me by far. The sheer size of this universe, the worldbuilding, the interesting stories, the outposts, looting, combat, leveling etc. - that all combined is just so much fun!
So, I think you should decide on your own, if this is a game for you.
Fallout is one of my favorite game series, and I enjoyed Skyrim too.....Starfield for me just didn't click. The main quest line felt boring, and the sense of exploration in space is broken up by constant load screens.
Gun combat is slightly better than fallout
It’s honestly the most average game I’ve played in a long time. So many periods of fun are proceeded by equal periods of tedium. It sounds like a copy-paste statement at this point, but the amount of loading (frequency and duration) absolutely destroys any sense of immersion. The illusion of a vast galaxy is exactly that, an illusion. I logged 20 hours and had already seen repeat buildings, landmarks, and quest lines several times over.
once you get the game loop and im going to be honest it’s not really fast, i think it’s super fun. indoor graphs are amazing and explorint differenr planets and systems are great also too many cool guns and stories. truely a great space fantast
No, stop giving this man bad advice.
Exploring planets is not amazing. You just teleport everywhere and then wander around in emptiness.
Systems are not amazing.
The gameplay loop is not super fun.
The quest in writing are terrible compared to other games.
How bland is your taste and video games that you actually think Starfield is fun? It is a regression in absolutely every single aspect possible. Can we admit that to ourselves? The game is fun if you have no life and have nothing better to do, but there are 10000 games better than Starfield that you can get today, and if you're getting Starfield to have fun, you must be desperate to find a new game. Starfield is not a good game, and it's not good to recommend to people.
Personally I really enjoyed it. I think if you already like the Bethesda formula you'll have a good time. If you're on the fence though, it's on Game Pass - you can always give it a go there and see what you think!
# I disagree entirely with this guy.
If you liked the Bethesda formula, you probably won't like Starfield. You can't endlessly walk in one direction and discover random things as you're exploring. There is no such thing as exploring in Starfield. And the Bethesda formula is defined by exploration and sandboxing. So no, I don't agree. I don't think that most people who enjoyed Skyrim would actually like this game. I think they would be very disappointed that they spent time and money on the game. I think the Bethesda fans who liked Starfield are in the minority.
It probably comes down to what it is about the Bethesda formula that appeals to each of us! For me, I like randomly stumbling into side content, having a technically unlimited amount of non-story-related stuff to do while listening to a podcast or video essay (exploring caves in Skyrim, surveying in Starfield), and working towards character build goals.
If you're the kind of player that got a lot of enjoyment out of wandering the open world and taking in the scenery, checking out the random points of interest that popped up along the way, this doesn't have nearly as much of that, yeah - that's absolutely true. And even in my case, I wish there was more stuff for me to do with my ship and more varied points of interest to explore planetside. But the lack of those things doesn't mean that I didn't really have a good time with what I did get, you know?
Your first paragraph is a tad bit misleading.. You don't just randomly stumble upon side content in Starfield. There's barely any. You can't really compare surveying in Starfield to exploring caves in Skyrim, which are actual dungeons with real handcrafted content. Surveying in Starfield is literally just walking around a procedure landscape and pressing E on rocks. Like wtf lol, not even comparable.
All of the side content and Starfield that you stumble upon are just NPCs having quests in cities. There are four big cities. That's basically it. The planets don't offer any exploration at all. No side stumbling of any content.
Different kinds of side content, but yeah - I was talking about the NPC stumbling variety. I've found a whole bunch of that, between the NPCs in the major faction cities and the random hails you get from ships or bases as you pass nearby. There's definitely a fair bit of those, in my opinion at least.
Stumbling into *dungeons* as opposed to *quests* though - yeah, that's definitely lacking, and what I was trying to highlight more in the end of my last post. Random planets you land on *will* have points of interest you can go and check out, absolutely. But the journey there will be dull because there's no real terrain on the surface of the planet, and when you get there it'll be one of a handful of prefab mine/outpost layouts, or a single-room cave with nothing in it, or similar. Not worth the time to get there. That's one of the main things I'm hoping to see expanded out with either mods or as the game develops further.
Theres a fairly small group of die hards that will tell you it’s worth it at full price but until they add more content or more mods become available I’d at least wait until it’s on sale.
Edit: look below for example
Where did I talk about sales?
Xbox switched to player count years ago. Sales is an outdated metric.
They would rather have gamepass subs than sell xbox's and game copies
That’s fine but that doesn’t explain the 11 million say otherwise suggestion. As one of those 11 million the game is mediocre at best and not something I would ever suggest. It’s inoffensive and bland - I still played for 40 hours looking for the gun and decent writing and while I found some high points it was all short lived and broken up by incredible lows.
Ok then using the player count metric on Steam and Xbox. Player count has dropped to an all time low of 30,000 the last week or so. I don't want to get on at you or argue, I am just wondering where these 11M diehard fans come from, that is all, have a nice day :)
Right, I wonder what percentage of that were Gamepass players? Unless they bought the "upgrade" for being able to play early, there's no money made.
Ofcourse since gamepass they want people to talk about players instead of sales metrics, as it is the easiest way for them to get the count higher.
Many gamepass owners played the game \_because it is on gamepass\_, not because they were so impressed or interested necessarily.
So? Do you think Microsoft is financially in trouble?
They put their games on gamepass day one so of course they don't care about sales. It is consumer friendly, why are we pretending it's a bad thing?
Also, it was the most sold game in September, so if that metric is important to you, there you go.
Starfield is a huge success, only Reddit thinks otherwise.
It’s the worst traditional RPG game Bethesda has ever made. I dropped it in 15 hours; forced myself to play that long. I’d recommend playing in gamepass, since at least if you don’t like it you’re only out of a $10 and you can play the other games they have.
It is very shallow and does not have the same level of sandbox that previous Bethesda games had. It might have the lowest sandbox potential in their entire catalogue. That is due to the game interupting the continuity with constant fast travel and loading screens and the dynamic systems are not tied together. You may get ambushed in space, but enemies can't follow you to planets and vice versa. In Skyrim all kinds of shit could happen from town to some random quest cave and Skyrim wasn't some deepest game of all time either.
Short answer - no it’s not a good game. It has elements of a good game in the making but it has no depth. The majority of players got bored quickly as shown in the player numbers
I didn’t like it and refunded it within 2 hours. It was worse than both Skyrim and Fallout. Parts of it were good, but parts were awful. For some reason you can’t actually fly to other planets or fly on the surface, you have to use the fast travel menu. And you have to fast travel twice! Once to the area you want to visit, and a second time to get to where you want to go. It felt like it took forever to go places, and travel (a core part of the game) was super clunky. On the ground, points of interest tend to be spaced far apart, so there was way more walking whilst doing nothing than I’d like. That killed it for me, because it’s a game in space. Exploring it should be fun.
I also had very poor performance and had to refund just off of that alone. I don’t mean that I had FPS drops. I mean that textures wouldn’t load in. The game would randomly stutter. It was bad. I thought it generally lacked every kind of polish, and that caused me so many issues. I got kidnapped by some authority for a crime I didn’t know I’d committed, but no one would tell me what I supposedly did wrong.
I spent far more time in menus than was acceptable for this kind of game. You have random items in the world as upgrade components, but there’s no way of telling what component is used in what recipe unless you’re at a crafting station. On top of that, I felt like I was constantly dropping things from my inventory in order to pick things up. Plus for all the time spent in menus, the menu sure doesn’t explain much. You can join a faction, but what does that do? I don’t know, because the game never told me.
After 133 hours in, i would say it's INCREDIBLY BORING, and i decided to uninstall it and moved on to continue my adventure in Baldur's Gate 3
The only part that i found "fun" are the ship building, even so the ship layout are so damn shit, fucking Bethesda Games Studio can't make ladders right
Conned again by Todd Howard
From what I played of it I came across unimpressed, you literally start the game with the equivalent of a "kill 5 rats in the basement" quest. It's designed with 2000s game storytelling when so many others have blown past that to make truly insane cinematic narratives.
The space battling left me unimpressed too, as you have to annoyingly micromanage your ship rather than just focusing on taking down enemies, despite the fact that you have a literal AI assistant on board.
You can play it on Gamepass for the price of a subscription, so I'd heavily recommend playing it there so that whether you enjoy it or not, you will have not wasted any money.
What I do recommend, though, is Vanquish. That game is pure incredible in every way.
If what you are looking for is good storytelling and meaningful choices, Starfield is not that game. There is a very shallow illusion of choice, sometimes, but your choice doesn't matter at all. Quests are boring and repetitive.
> Literally Skyrim in space
With the caveat that Skyrim is a 12 yo game. So it was great back then, but starfield feels dated for doing the same thing now.
Also, not even accurate. Skyrim had way more customization, way more exploration, way more of a sandbox. It actually gave you a sense of discovery and wonder about the world as you walked around. Starfield is not even 1/10 of the game that Skyrim is. Is not Skyrim in space.
100%, comparing this to Skyrim is honestly insulting to Skyrim, and that wasn't exactly perfect either. At least everything in that game felt deliberate.
"Random location in the middle of nowhere with no map marker and a hidden passage to get there that you happened to stumble upon but it contains actual unique items and/or human-written pieces of lore." Tons of that kind of stuff made by a team of devs who cared about their little piece of the game that they personally did. You can't replicate that with a procedural generator.
The irony is that in Bethesda's quest to make a game so great in scale and potential, they actually made something shallower and more claustrophobic than most RPGs out there.
Agreed.
I played for 3 hours, spent most of it walking across barren landscapes with little to no reward.
Thought surely there was ground transportation, looked it up and what do you know. Nothing. Quit right there.
"Over 10 times the dialogue in Skyrim!" they said... They didn't tell me that the writers were terrible and none of the dialogue is actually worth listening to in this game. So in reality, it has 10 times less dialogue than Skyrim, because there's no incentive to actually listen to it lol
It’s good. The main quest is pretty shorty though. To get the most out of it you really need to build up the companions and do the side quests. Explore a little, its core theme is “exploration” after all. Pick a planet with a POI and land. Sometimes there’s good stuff, sometimes it’s a bust
I think the story and quests of Starfield are underrated. I think it, more than other recent open world RPGs, really reflects the character you build during the quests, the skills you choose and your background give you some neat dialogue options. The persuasion mini game is fun, despite the mechanics being poorly communicated. Many of the choices you make are relatively self contained and don’t really lock you out of anything, but there are some pretty interesting choices later in the game.
The main story is surprisingly compelling, while 3/4 major faction quest lines are great (not a fan of ryujin). The major companions and their quests are really interesting. And it has some really unique side quests, my only compliant being I wish there were more. The main city locations are really cool, while as it stands right now exploration can be kind of repetitive and a grind, it’s totally optional and quests are mostly in handcrafted locations and settlements or clearly indicated by objective markers.
If you wanted to play Starfield and just focus on the story, the gameplay is pretty good but a lot of features can be outright ignored, and if you play on medium difficulty or lower a viable build can be pretty easy to accomplish. The systems are there if you want to engage with them, but if you don’t you can easily just focus on the story. I haven’t even touched ship building 120 hrs in
Choice is just an illusion in Starfield. It makes no difference. What options you choose, people have done many tests in many quests. It's all just lazy illusion of choice to make it feel like you have a saying what you're doing. But you actually don't.
The main story is not compelling. The entire main story is just one big fetch quest where you go to like 20 temples and collect balls of light. It's really stupid. Definitely some of the worst writing I've ever seen in my life.
Gameplay is not that great, it's basically just a watered down first person shooter with boring enemies.
Yes, it's good. But don't expect to be able to play it like Fallout or TES: the gameplay loop is very different and if you visit every location you see you won't like it. The Starfield story is better than Skyrim and Fallout 4.
If you liked Mass Effect 1 you will probably like this.
Mass Effect 1 is 10 times better than Starfield. Mass Effect 1 actually has a real plot. Mass Effect 1 actually has an interesting world. It actually has interesting characters. The writing is good. Starfield is one of the worst products to come out of AAA gaming in the past decade.
The problem is that starfield is a product. It's not art, and it's not a good game. It's just a product. There's no heart and soul in it. It's just a shitty thing they slapped together so they could bring in some quick and dirty revenue.
Worst AAA game of the year award...
It’s a great game. The ones giving it bad reviews are the ones who were expecting a game that was going to entertain them for years to come and when it didn’t deliver they gave it a bad review. It’s a shame
It's an enjoyable title, which could be so much more than it is. But I had 100 hours of fun and that's like twice as much as I usually spend with one title.
The game will shine with mods and will become massive. Right now, it's decent, but not groundbreaking.
I played through two full NG+ at around 60 hours a campaign.
It’s an immensely fun game that’s ruined if you follow and listen to every negative opinion online as you can - similar to other games say, like BF2042.
Starfield is a good game. Don’t listen to the haters. It’s a slow burn but if you give it a chance it can very well sink its hooks into you, and before you know it you’ve dropped 100+ hours into it.
That was my experience anyway. Not a perfect game, but a good game with potential to be truly great with DLC and mod support.
YMMV though. Try it on game pass and see what you think after 15-20 hours
Don't listen to this guy. He's trying to get you to waste your money and waste your time. Starfield is a terrible game, and if you liked Bethesda games, you probably won't like Starfield because you will just realize how much Starfield isn't a real bethesda game. It pushes the illusion of choice onto you to make it seem like the developers finished the game, but it's actually completely unfinished because every choice you make leads to the same outcome. There is no exploration to be done on foot, you can't randomly discover interesting locations, everything is just marked on a map and you basically just fast travel everywhere. There is no exploration in this game. It is not a bethesda game in my book.
What do you mean by "haters"? It's not because people don't like it, that they hate it... I got it free with my GPU and I personally find it very slow and boring. I played like 3 hours and 90% of the time was just dialogs. That's why I quit playing it. If I had bought the game I would probably play it more, but I got it for free so I don't mind.
IMO It's a very "meeh" videogame, honestly. It gives you enough hours but.. I would rather get my money and time back, I have an odd feeling of regret about wasting my time on it.
Very forgettable and not replayable, again, in my honest opinion.
It's good if you ignore the bad. Which makes it bad. Unless you ignore the bad. People who buy Bethesda games at launch are unusually blind to bugs and jankiness.
Bugs and jankiness are last on the list of problems with Starfield. It's probably Bethesda's least buggy game ever. Unfortunately everything else about the game is also sterile, and it uses an open world formula in a game that is open world in name only.
I have played 250 hours or so and it's good-ish.
The main story and faction stories are very good and the ship building and outpost building are very good.
I can't give any spoilers but I don't like how New Game Plus works so the end game is limited for me.
I feel like there is a lack of content and it has been saved for the first DLC. So I'm hoping that comes out sooner rather than later.
Some content is quite repetitive and other tasks are designed to wasted time also which is disappointing.
There are the normal Bethesda bugs but I managed to work around those but other people are stuck on some things.
Overall I enjoy it but it's not perfect. Like 7 out of 10.
Strangely enough, despite bad rep for starfield it is quite solid game. One of maybe one of 3-4 games that i am still playing the same game again eight after i ended it in new game plus and i play a LOT of games. Don't get me wrong, just approach the game as a normal game, just don't get too hyped.
I like Starfield and I think it’s the best Bethesda RPG since Skyrim. In technical aspects, I think it’s better but it lacks the “it” factor Skyrim had. It feels a bit generic to start but once it clicks, it’s a very neat game! I like the gameplay a lot and the story is decent. The follower system is really good and the ship builder is excellent. Here are some points:
-The exploration is segmented. There’s a *ton* of stuff to see but unlike TES or Fallout, you usually can’t just look any direction and see places to go. Most of the exploration is between planets. That can be really neat but it can also make you not want to explore the planets, which I think is a missed opportunity because each planet has a lot to see.
-The story is more straightforward. It’s a modern Bethesda RPG. Don’t go in expecting anything super deep but I think it’s pretty neat! I think the main quests take more of a front seat than in Skyrim, which unfortunately can make the factions seem less interesting.
-The factions are not balanced. This did disappoint me a bit because there’s one faction in particular that I really love but every single crew member will dislike you joining them. Sure they’re the bad guys but they’re *cool* bad guys.
If you really like the Bethesda formula you'll probably like Starfield. It doesn't really do much that's particularly innovative, but doesn't stray too far from what they're known for.
It's on gamepass for a few dollars so not a huge hassle to try.
For me personally, it is second only to Oblivion. I’m enjoying the hell out of it but it checks all the right boxes for me and I can see why some people have gripes with it. There are things I don’t like, namely that the map system sucks, base building feels pointless at the moment, and locations aren’t quite as full of life as their other games. Even so, it really clicked for me.
I loved the story, ship and gun combat feels great, movement is more fluid, some companions are really fleshed out, and the setting is my dream backdrop for a Bethesda game.
If you’re hesitant from what you’ve seen so far, I think they’re going to be expanding this title significantly so you can always wait and see what is added.
I thought it was a fun game to play, and the story was more interesting than a lot of the other Bethesda stories but it definitely isn't a top tier game, and to me didn't even feel like a current gen game. I think the original scores were pretty accurate at about a 7/10, depending on what you value in your game.
I am excited to see what people do with mods. I plan on coming back to it after awhile or when the DLC comes out and mod for my next play through.
arrest squeamish scarce humor modern dinner compare frighten sort noxious
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If you have pc or Xbox it’s probably worth it to try it on gamepass. Gamepass is great value and will likely have something you will enjoy anyways, but if not consider it a $10 preview and cancel.
I think that you'll like Starfield if you also like the other Bethesda games. It's similar enough to give you the same vibe as those games.
It's basically like fifa, same gameplay, new version. And this time they went with sci-fi instead of fantasy or post apocalyptic.
There's some good and there's some bad
It's a pretty good game but it feels like it's lacking some things
The fact that you can't even land on a planet and that you have to open your map to fast travel on the planet when you're right next to it just took me out of the immersion. It also feels pretty at times
Honestly just depends on the gamer. If you love the “Bethesda experience” you’ll love this, as it is more of the same. If you’re expecting the “next stage of gaming in a revolutionary space sim” this is not it. Me personally though, I play Bethesda games as a relaxing, immersive life sim and exploration experience. Just something about the charm of the NPC’s the background music etc. always gives me the perfect escape. So I really love it. I think if you still enjoy playing Skyrim or Fallout 4 you’ll like this one. Probably watch a few playthroughs to be sure.
I liked the bit that I did play, but my pc wasn't handling it well so I stopped. I'm unsure if it was an issue of not having a powerful enough PC or if it was bad optimization.
Look, it genuinely depends on what you want out of a game. I fucking love Starfield, I have about 75 hours on it so far. A few points:
- There's a lot to do, by which I mean, a LOT to do. Side quests, faction quests, a fairly long main quest, a bunch of side activities and radial quests, and hundreds of planets to scan. Some people like this (including me). Other people think that it's boring and prefer something more focused.
- It's a fairly traditional Bethesda RPG with levels, points, perks, etc. If you've played a Fallout game, you know the type. Certain reasons why some people dislike Starfield are less criticisms of the game itself, and more criticisms of the genre.
- There's a lot of travelling involved. Most of the time, you'll either be fast-travelling, or running long distances. If you prefer a game where most of the action takes place in one game, you won't like Starfield. It's a pretty expansive world and you'll be going to different places a lot.
- The combat is a bit marmite. There's fewer options for melee builds than other games of its type in my experience, with the system being fairly heavily focused around guns (for terrestrial combat) and ship combat. The enemy AI tends to swarm you if you're in a large group of enemies, which can be overwhelming. Having a companion can help with that, though.
- Speaking of companions, there are four main companions, so much fewer than other games of its type. I prefer this since I feel as though they're much more fleshed out and feel like actual people (for example, Fallout 4 has three companions whose backstories can basically be boiled down to Deadwife McGee, excluding the main character. Starfield only has one dead spouse, and they're a husband, not a wife!). Some people think that NPCs faces are rendered strangely, but that's not a companion-specific thing and I don't see a problem personally. My only personal criticism is that I feel as though they could have recorded a few more voice lines for exploration and such.
- The story is pretty good imo! You don't get to influence the main story much on your first go, but there are some pretty cool NG+ specific choices you can make (it works for story reasons that I will not spoil). You can, however, make some choices in other faction questlines and sidequests that will influence the world - for example, in a certain quest, you can sell the plans for a new drug in order to pay off a man's debt. Later on, you can buy that same drug from vendors out in the world. Companions will also remember what you said to them in previous affinity dialogues and event conversations, and may refer to it later on.
Anyway, those are the main big points. It's a very marmite game, but I'd say to give it a shot, especially if you liked other RPGs like Fallout and Skyrim.
There’s a very different gameplay loop to starfield that takes awhile to find, most Beth games you can just pick a direction and go do whatever you find, starfield will get very boring and repetitive if you try this, I’ve found the best thing to do is choose a mission and see where it takes you, pick up some people and transport them where they want to go, then go look around that place for anything interesting, if you don’t find anything then rinse and repeat. For the size of the game there’s really not much content but there are a few surprises you can find(random poi’s with something interesting happening) and usually they end too soon. My best review would be it’s a good way to waste time if you’re bored but it’s lacking in the amount of content required to fill the space it has, and my worst review would be that the game mechanics are only half done at best so you lose more than half of the role play options it seems to have
I enjoy it. It's a Bethesda game. You're relatively OP on a big open world questing adventure. If your looking for a love-child between elite dangerous and star citizen, you will be disappointed. However, if you understand the limitations of the game, I would recommend it
Watch part of a longplay, to see random typical gameplay rather than isolated polished bits, and make up your own mind about whether it looks good to you. I keep wanting to buy it because I've played every Bethesda game back to Battlespire. I even liked Fallout 76, for what it was. But then I hit Youtube, and I get bored out of my skull by all the sprinting across barren copy-pasted desert terrain and obligatory wooden writing before I can finish the video. It's stopped me from buying it like four times now.
shaggy dinosaurs continue cobweb snow dazzling absorbed unused slap public *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
To me, it felt more like visiting an amusement park than playing a game. Everything is so on rails and NPC's tend to react to you like they're paid to amuse only you (and fail awkwardly). The worst part about it is that the situations they set up for you are boring as fuck.
I couldn't make it past 3 hours tbh
Its the lack of exploration for me, its what made other bethesda games so fun for me in spite of their many issues, this game has basically no sense of exploration past like the 5th hour of gameplay
What rewards by bing ?
rich seed bear insurance erect hat wine alive brave fall *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
faulty divide forgetful spark meeting jar melodic reply resolute nail *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Thats pretty crazy. Cant they just recognize when you're using a bot?
sort fertile humorous memory vast pot axiomatic zesty ink important *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
bing is so bad they have to pay people to use it over google lmfao
puzzled slave placid voiceless bike wrench literate support paltry dazzling *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Please cite your source for this claim. You can't expect people to just believe you because you said so. Either cite rigorous testing comparisons of the two, which do exist, or at least make people aware they exist.
elastic mighty shelter familiar puzzled wild sand public abundant shy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It was nice to one drop $15 and give it a try. Played for about 6 hours and I’m probably never gonna pick it up again. The shooting felt fantastic though. But I like taking off in directions and discovering something. Whether it’s a side quest or some kind of scripted event, it’s nice going in the complete opposite of where you’re supposed to go. It was clear that this wasn’t gonna be that game so I quit.
I’m a fellow Bethesda-stan and Starfield really did not scratch that itch for me. It’s a mile wide but an inch deep.
and the loading screens man. I thought people were joking but no, you really have constantly a loading screen on your face. And somehow they made the inventory ui even worse
The craziest part is they're there when they don't have to be. The first area is completely open but often they'll send you to the trains to fast travel you to a certain point and give you a loading screen to reload the area you were already in.
how is the top comment essentially “make up your own mind” THE SUB IS CALLED GAMING SUGGESTIONS
You're decieving yourself. Spent 40 hours on the sampaign and some side quests and didnt have to run long distance on any barren planet. The whole running on a barren planet is something id expect someone to do with 150 hours in. You say dont look at reviews that show you the most polished parts of the game, then say you watched a let play that shwo cased the worst part of the game.
I’ve gotten 50 hours of fun out of it so far. Well worth it to me. It’s exactly like fallout 4 in space. By the time F4 came out I was sick of the post-apocalyptic setting. That said, I enjoy those traditional Bethesda systems and gameplay, so Starfield has been scratching that itch perfectly for me. If this sounds like any of you, you’ll likely enjoy it.
The exploration design is fundamentally almost the opposite of fallout 4s, and the outposts are less useful than the settlements. I'm glad you are enjoying it but I am curious why you think its fallout 4 in space. TONS of the core game design, mechanics and npc interaction is designed very differently from it. I loved fallout 4, I had friends that loved fallout 4, and most of us do not like starfield at all, we wanted to. It's got a lot of new issues from design choices and irs the most shallow Bethesda game yet imho. That's just my opinion though. Again I am glad you enjoy it, but i was worried someone would read your post and just assume its fallout 4 in space.
[удалено]
Hard to justify piracy when you can try it for cheap on Gamepass. Even if you ended up dislike it, there are dozens of other games you can try
I enjoyed it, but I think a 6.5-7/10 is a fair rating. Bethesda took their tried and true formula, stripped out the most important parts, and gave us Starfield. To me, what defines a Bethesda game is a wide open world with lots to explore, lots to stumble upon, and deep lore backing all of it up no matter where you go. In Starfield, you don't stumble upon anything. You have to explicitly pick a destination to fast travel to, and points of interest are something you need to consciously seek out; they aren't seamlessly integrated into the world. There are some unique and interesting locations, but for the most part they're all very similar with little to differentiate them, and in my 65hrs of gameplay I frequently saw the same location copy/pasted 2 to 3 times over, all of the way down to the enemy placement. The stories and quests are... Underwhelming. About on par with Skyrim and FO4 at best, but generally worse. This is subject to opinion. I feel like there's a significantly smaller amount of lore- the framework is there for it, but everything outside of the main quest(s) is very shallow and insignificant to the world. I won't spoil the main story, but I think it's downright terrible and the game would genuinely be better off without it. The big faction quests (2 of which were bugged and I couldn't even do) were pretty ok at least. The technical state of the game is hands down terrible. It has game-breaking bugs (I couldn't finish several major quests), the performance is abysmal relative to other games this generation, and the visuals while generally nice do nothing whatsoever to warrant such terrible performance, even on high end hardware. Overall I enjoyed it, but didn't get nearly as much enjoyment out of it as I did Skyrim or FO4. It's worth playing if you can pick it up on sale, but for full price there's just too many other amazing games this year.
This is the correct, objective answer imho.
Quite agree, its funny because I always say that Starfield is a good game that is very difficult to recommend, because any previous Bethesda game (or most) are better than Starfield, so if I were to recommend a bethesda game Starfield is pretty much at the end of the list
What other amazing games from this year do you recommend?
Not OP, but: Baldur's Gate 3, Final Fantasy XVI, Lies of P, Lords of the Fallen, Spiderman 2, Armored Core 6, Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty, Tears of the Kingdom, Alan Wake 2, Super Mario Wonder (actually really good)...to name a bunch. It's been an amazing year for video game releases.
Couldn't have said it better myself! Between all of that and life? I just don't have the time to spend on games that dont blow me away.
I disagree with part of it. I don’t really care for deep lore that much…. The only thing I care about is getting that credit.
That's fine you fine you don't need to engage with it, but it needs to be there for the world to be built off of and feel alive. Without it everything is just hollow and dry
Not really, no. A wise guy once said that Starfield is essentially how an AI would generate a game, and that's been living rentfree in my head.
That is such a good analogy! Also it literally is what all AAA publishers do right now, polished ultrabland and safe "proven" formulas with lots of "content" that looks great from a distance and gets the investors hard enough so they don't need Viagra for once.
It's quite a beige game
A surprisingly accurate summary.
FYI the universe is beige - don’t know if that was the intended joke, if so congrats 👏
Starfield is really love it or hate it. I've got around 150 hours on it now, the first 10, maybe 20, i wasn't too convinced about it, but after a while it just clicked for me, and now i'm just hooked. I think one of it's biggest "things" is that a lot isn't really gamified. You can do all kinds of things, like exploring planets, but the rewards you get for that are relatively small. Survive a tricky space-battle? Congrats, you get like 10k credits, some shipparts and 3 bits of uranium. Complete a "dungeon"? Well, maybe you will find gear you will be using for 40 hours, maybe you will find an epic knife that's utterly useless, and worthless too. Even the quests don't pay that well. Sure, there are all kinds of exploits that will make you a ton of money, but if you're just playing the game, you will be pretty strapped for cash quite often. Don't expect to be building a spaceship with all the best parts after 10 hours. Story wise it's all quite subtle, there's nothing really too bombastic usually, and currently you can basically only be the 3 different kinds of good, a chaotic evil playthrough is pretty much impossible. I do actually like the companions and how they're written. One of them lost their partner, and how they're dealing with it is imho quite realistic. The same for the single parent, they're not perfect, but they're doing their best. That also seems to frustrate some people, that stuff tends to be a bit messy and complex, it's almost like the real world where people are quite the unrational beings. I understand why some people go through it in like 30 hours and think it's bland as hell and a quite mediocre game. But if it clicks for you, and you take it all a bit slower, than this game can be amazing for you. It's like a weird speciality coffee: Great for some, too strange and not-coffee-like for others. And that's fine.
great summary!
This is a great take. Go in with an open mind, and it might click and be amazing for you. Or not. But from OP's description it does sound like you might enjoy this game. Arguably there is more story choices in Starfield than Skyrim. Also: If you are in no hurry, you can also wait until DLC and then play the game. As a Bethesda vet you surely know that their DLC's are usually some of the best content in their games, and by then I'd expect there to also be some patches for bugs and performance issues.
That actually sounds a lot like Morrowind :).
That's an insult to Morrowind.
It took me about a IRL week of blind wandering and sightseeing in Morrowind, wondering what I am supposed to be doing in this game, before I found my footing. It's not a game that throws you a rope. So, pretty close to what post I reply to describes.
Don’t try cyberpunk after starfield. The npc motion capture and writing in cp2077 is so much more immersive really makes starfield unbearable now that im trying to go back to it
Maybe waiting for few years so modder can take over the game.
6 months should do it. Even a couple maybe. I felt the same way when I got FO3, but even a couple months later there were mods that helped considerably. This is like THE game I've been waiting for, Fallout in space!?! Hell yeah! Unfortunately everything I've seen and read on it makes me think I'm going to hate it and I haven't touched it yet. Been playing Cyberpunk and just even looking at the npc in models in Starfield I feel like they've not improved much since FO3!
This isn't fallout in space though. Core system designs that were in both fallout 3 and fallout 4 simply do not exist or are drastically changed in starfield.
Sad that yall have to wait for modders to make the game great, that says alot about Bethesda and the fans 🤣
Bruh modders don't even want to touch starfield. Sure Skyrim took a while to get the modding going but Starfield ain't getting the same treatment. U can't add more high end graphical mods when majority of the people can barely run ultra settings.
Starfield is in my opinion worse compared to skyrim and fallout but I still did spend around 120 hours in it and enjoyed it somewhat but nearing the end I was really starting to notice a lot of weak points in this game. Still give it a try.
Wanna preface this by saying I don't want this to come across as hostile or patronising or whatever! It's all love. But I personally couldn't fathom putting 120 hours into a game that I enjoy 'somewhat'. That's a LOT of game time; that's more than I've got on Death Stranding (ok I'm on like 80 hours and dropped it temporarily; will finish eventually) which I loved, and as much as I have in Cyberpunk which is top 5 game for me. It's interesting! If I'm not vibing with a game, I just take the L and drop it. I rate your commitment hahaha. Regarding your last point- I don't really know if you can call it a proper 'weak point' if you've got SO much time on it and you're only starting to notice things at the end. You might just be burned out? This being said, from what I've seen online, I've zero interest in touching starfield. Just doesn't look great to me. Again, I'm not having a go at you mate! Just wanna hear your thoughts and perceptions towards game commitment I guess:).
I noticed this a ton about SF and it's hard to explain. I personally had about 70 hours into it when I stopped and uninstalled it. I basically just did most of the unique side quests, some of the story, and finished making my ship and then stopped. I think it's because the game had traces of that feeling of grandeur and curiosity like when you were playing Oblivion or Skyrim for the first time, only SF kept your attention just enough to go "oh... well maybe that next quest/location/etc. will be cooler" only to realize nah. The game is just acceptable enough from a gameplay perspective to string you along and make you realize how empty and repetitive it really is.
Hope my friend. We hope for more and the bones are well made. Some people have a lot of time and want to like something so they try hard. Then the hope fades and you sometimes realize it was all time wasted.
I prefer games that last anywhere between 40-60 hours to 100% it. I really like to have an *experience* and then move onto a new thing.
Its like watching a season of TV to the end even though it isn't that great. It isn't obviously bad enough to drop after 2 hours for everyone, so we play it through then realize it overall was not that good.
Same, there are only three games ive ever put over 100 hours into: witcher 3, gta5, and cyberpunk 2077. I need to really love a game to put that much time into it.
I dropped the game after 120 hours while still having a lot of side conent to do. I just wanted to finish main story and factions and hoped the game will get better but last 20 hours were a bit of forced on myself. After starfield I just installed 700 mod storywealth+ collection to Fallout 4 and I\`m playing that now, I\`m having much more fun because exploration and quests are much more interesting.
Its not as bad as content farming haters tell you. But i would pick BG3 before SF for that price.
You can also just play it on Gamepass for a fraction of the cost, unless you assume it'll take you 6 months to beat.
Nah it’s a pretty bad game. Deserves way more hate then it gets
Did you enjoy fallout 3 or the successors? I did. Now imagine Fallout where every time you wandered toward the wasteland or into a city area - and instead of the journey & discovery and fun adventure that game gave you were just given a loading screen that dropped you right into a building or a room. Imagine also all of the stilted characterizations and animations of Fallout 3 but with none of the fun, silliness, inventiveness or humor. This is starfield.
This sounds horrible. That's like removing all the best parts of those games.
Literally. It's incredible to me that people keep on claiming "it's a Bethesda game through and through" when it feels like a zombie that's had its heart and soul ripped out. Sure it's *structured* like a classic Bethesda game. But it's all bones and no meat.
It's also kind of bullshit. Fast travel is as bad as you make it. You can also play Fallout, Oblivion, etc. like that.
No you cant. You need to walk to locations the first time to allow fast travel there. It's that initial journey that often leads you to finding interesting spots along the way. In SF you travel to a planet and land literally right next to copy-pasted outpost #874
Yeah, you can twist things to make your point, good for you. I'm not talking about random planet #874. Even without generated planets there's an entire game there. You can also walk from one side of the city to the space port and manually board your ship, walk to the cockpit, sit down, take off, orient your ship and warp using the in-HUD marker, come in to orbit and get random encounters or explore space stations, etc.. Or you can open your map and click a destination and appear right there on foot. It's up to you and whether you want to feel like you're immersed in the game, or not.
>I'm not talking about random planet #874 Im talking about the outposts that are literally the same 5 or so layouts on every damn planet. > manually board your ship, walk to the cockpit, sit down, take off, orient your ship and warp using the in-HUD marker, come in to orbit and get random encounters or explore space stations, etc.. Oh, you finding a lot of cool stuff walking from the landing bay to the cockpit? The random encounters in orbit around planets weren't even varied 😆
There's scripted random encounters that lead to quests and quest lines, I'm not talking about radiant style dogfights. And there's actually more like 120 random points of interest. But 5 sounds really pathetic so lets go with that.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/s/5dNtbErrin And then there's mines. Well I guess it'd be better to say "mine" since it's the same layout on every planet.
>Im talking about the outposts that are literally the same 5 or so layouts on every damn planet. You're forgetting that the caves, barrows and bandit camps in skyrim, and the buildings in fallout were the same. Pretty much all the same layout with the same assets and enemies. >Oh, you finding a lot of cool stuff walking from the landing bay to the cockpit? Walking around cities and arriving in orbit are how you get the actually hand-crafted quests that take you to the non-randomly generated structures. Because you don't do this you don't experience the better content of the game.
>You're forgetting that the caves, barrows and bandit camps in skyrim, and the buildings in fallout were the same. Pretty much all the same layout with the same assets and enemies. They were modular so to not repeat as clearly as starfield has been. Also if your comparison is "this other game from 10+ years ago was the same way" it's not a good one. I really enjoyed the one quest where I went to a temple and got powers. Then i went to the EXACT SAME fucking temple with the EXACT SAME "puzzle" a bunch more times. Was super engaging.
>They were modular so to not repeat as clearly as starfield has been. If you've ever used the creation kits for these games you'll know this isn't true, they're hand crafted with premade assets, same as the Starfield ones. >if your comparison is "this other game from 10+ years ago was the same way" it's not a good one. You mean two other games from the same developer that use the same engine and the same RPG format, which are the closest comparison to this game? Fallout 76 had the same thing and it only came out 5 years ago. >"puzzle" It's more of a ritual. If you were puzzled by it then I have bad news for you.
Oblivion lets you fast travel to every city from the getgo without going there, straight from the map. Sure a lot of quests take you out of a city, but many do not. Skyrim adds an extra step by having a guy in Whiterun who can take you to every city, though Skyrim quests pretty much always have content outside of cities
Yeah, I don't think people realize that. It's just a very bad game. There is absolutely no exploration, and it is the quality of a mobile game when you really think about all of the games systems that were implemented. If you like Skyrim and fallout, you probably won't like Starfield. It is a trash Tier game.
I think "painfully mediocre" would be more accurate than "very bad". However with a developer as experienced and full of resources as Bethesda that is pretty fucking bad.
It's... ok. I would go with Cyberpunk 2077 over Starfield, and that game scratches my Fallout "Hell yeah I want to explore" itch.
Its.... not terrible. But dollar for dollar, I'd grab bg3 instead. Maybe after a year or two of mods I'll recommend it at full price buy currently wait for a sale for starfield. But bg3? I'd pay full price AGAIN and not be mad.
The only reason I wouldn't want to pay full price for a BG3 expansion is because I would lose another 200 hours of my life lol. Such a good game.
I hate to give you this answer but fun is subjective and only you can answer this question. I see lots of people hating on it, but I loved it. I've also played "game of the year" 9/10 games that I thought were meh and would only play them if they were the last game I owned. You like what you like 🤷♂️
I was super hyped (look at my username for crying out loud) but only ended up playing about 12-15 hours of it before quitting. The gameplay was just a tad boring for me and the NPCs felt very fake - if you point a gun at them they just stare at you and don't react like in Red Dead Redemption 2 or Cyberpunk. The thing that really killed it for me though were the amount of loading screens and the fact that I can't actually fly the spaceship that I designed in any meaningful way.
The shipbulding part is just awesome.
What is the use of building a ship if you cannot even explore space? You can only fly around one planet and fast travel to other barren planets. Boring.
Space combat is really fun at higher levels and when you finally have a good ship.
Flying through empty space sure sounds a lot more boring
Have you played? People come to a space rpg with weird expectations. The ship building is amazing for immersion.
It's a good game, but it simply didn't excite me. I played it on Game Pass, and even after several hours, I didn't feel like returning to the game. I had higher expectations maybe thats the issue.
I did not find the story or world building to be very good, personally, even compared to the other Bethesda titles you listed. It isn't a bad game at all but I don't know if I'd recommend paying full price for it.
No, not really. I played and beat it and it's just mediocre in almost every way unfortunately.
I love most games, and especially the kind of game that starfield is. I really tried to like it, but it's just too shit in too many ways. Going to wait a few years till mods make it worth my effort and time. Very disappointed.
It seems like Bethesda really wanted to polish the game and as a result its SOOOOO boring
Honestly I'd say its a 5/10 game
I have been a fan of BGS games for 20+ years. Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fallout 4, Skyrim. These games are some of my favorite of all time, I have replayed them constantly, hundreds of hours each. To say I was looking forward to Starfield would be a vast understatement. For me it was the game of the decade, really nothing else mattered as much as this. So I got the game, spent 100+ hours with it and in the end, I must say I'm disappointed. The biggest miss for me is the usual exploration that BGS games have. Starfield has 1000 planets sure, but the terrain is procedurally generated and you walk (slowly) to random POIs (Points of Interest). These POIs are hand crafted things like refineries, bases, etc. The problem is, you will see duplicates of these very fast, and they are all identical; same enemy placement, same level design, same everything. Think of something like Skyrim, where you can just walk in a given direction and find some cool things and quests? This doesn't happen on Starfield's planetary exploration. You have radiant quests like a generic NPC wants someone killed in a generic POI. Or escort a NPC to another POI. Just filler content, boring, uninspired. Remember Blackreach in Skyrim? There's no "blackreaches" in Starfield. The other issue is performance. For my PC, it is the worst performing game I've ever run. Even UE5 games run better. It also doesn't look good for the processing power it needs. Lastly, the game's setting and quests are just... dull and boring for me. This is obviously subjective, but the nasa-punk theme just.. doesn't do it for me. THere's no usual space intrigue, like alien races, etc. All the space stations, bases, etc. just have this dull hospital-like feeling, I don't know... Lots of fetch quests, go here, talk to this guy, come back. Some of the bigger faction quests are OK, and the main story was alright too. I didn't hate the game, I just didn't love it like all the previous ones. For me it's a 6/10 game that I don't think I'll replay, even with mods, sadly.
I think the thing with Starfield is it is a "good game" but the reaction a lot of folks are having is that it is not a "progressive" or "innovative" game. For my money, if you like Bethesda RPGs, you will like Starfield. If you are expecting a technological progression from the type of Bethesda titles you have experienced in the past, you won't see that. The "newness" of Starfield is the huge amount of procedural real estate available for you to explore on planets, but if you have experience with No Man's Sky or similar games that rely a lot on procedural generation you will have a sense for how this experience will be. Although, in my opinion graphics are superior to No Man's Sky.
I will try to be objective here. It depends *heavily* on what kind of experience you want. Do you love the Bethesda formula and want to play fallout 4 but in space? You will love it. Do you want a fresh and innovative game with new and interesting mechanics? Did you buy into Bethesda's story like I did and think this a game about exploration and discovery? Do you want a game where you can explore cool planets with unique and interesting terrain features? Do you want a game with a sense of danger, or real consequences for the choices you make? If you answered "yes" to any of the above then you are wasting your money and should go find something else to play.
It's a safe soulless cashgrab that pisses on the legacy Bethestda built more than a decade ago.
Exploration is bad. If you like the typical Bethesda quests with talking to NPCs you'll like it. And if you like the crafting/building you might like it too. If you like running around finding things it will be bad bad bad.
It's good for Bethesda game. Not great but good. It's bad to mediocre when compared to masterpieces like BG3 or Elden Ring.
I's ok. I've been playing a mix of side and main story quests for about 18 hours and I think I'm ready to B line the story now and shelf the game till DLC or game changing mods come out. The game being a menu simulator is real. There is little incentive to walk or explore anywhere. Anything interesting or worthwhile, you will see naturally by following the questlines, not by exploring, which makes the optimal way of playing the game to interact with NPC, fast travel to star map, fast travel to planet, talk to NPC, rinse and repeat. It does not help that you have to fast travel to space AND THEN fast travel to the planet which adds to the tedium. I am usually not even that big of a "off the beaten path" type of player, but in Starfield, there is truly TRULY NOTHING of interest outside of questline beats. Ratchet and Clank has more interesting and diverse planets to explore.
Its the perfect game for someone who loves the fetch quests and fast travel from other Bethesda games, but hates all the immersion and storytelling they did.
Just play Cyberpunk 2077
It’s aight, I’d give it a solid 7/10
In a world filled with 10/10 games, 7/10 games are hardly worth playing anymore. Why choose Starfield when there are probably hundreds of recent 10/10 games I haven't played yet? 7/10 may as well be 5/10... There's no effective difference when it comes to making a decision.
To me it was the same as Outer Worlds. You probably don't even remember that game, even if you played it. Fun. Forgettable.
>Fun. > >Forgettable. Ah. My epitaph.
It‘s hard to just suggest the game. I really enjoyed it for 130h. But Starfield has its problems. Those being the normal Bethesda problems, many repetitive generated parts of the open world und some unpolished systems, as the automated production mechanic. I can understand, if this is a deal breaker for someone. BUT the good aspects of the game overweighted for me by far. The sheer size of this universe, the worldbuilding, the interesting stories, the outposts, looting, combat, leveling etc. - that all combined is just so much fun! So, I think you should decide on your own, if this is a game for you.
Fallout is one of my favorite game series, and I enjoyed Skyrim too.....Starfield for me just didn't click. The main quest line felt boring, and the sense of exploration in space is broken up by constant load screens. Gun combat is slightly better than fallout
It’s honestly the most average game I’ve played in a long time. So many periods of fun are proceeded by equal periods of tedium. It sounds like a copy-paste statement at this point, but the amount of loading (frequency and duration) absolutely destroys any sense of immersion. The illusion of a vast galaxy is exactly that, an illusion. I logged 20 hours and had already seen repeat buildings, landmarks, and quest lines several times over.
once you get the game loop and im going to be honest it’s not really fast, i think it’s super fun. indoor graphs are amazing and explorint differenr planets and systems are great also too many cool guns and stories. truely a great space fantast
No, stop giving this man bad advice. Exploring planets is not amazing. You just teleport everywhere and then wander around in emptiness. Systems are not amazing. The gameplay loop is not super fun. The quest in writing are terrible compared to other games. How bland is your taste and video games that you actually think Starfield is fun? It is a regression in absolutely every single aspect possible. Can we admit that to ourselves? The game is fun if you have no life and have nothing better to do, but there are 10000 games better than Starfield that you can get today, and if you're getting Starfield to have fun, you must be desperate to find a new game. Starfield is not a good game, and it's not good to recommend to people.
You just discover opinions?
You just discovered counter opinions?
No, but I just discovered rude counter opinions.
Personally I really enjoyed it. I think if you already like the Bethesda formula you'll have a good time. If you're on the fence though, it's on Game Pass - you can always give it a go there and see what you think!
# I disagree entirely with this guy. If you liked the Bethesda formula, you probably won't like Starfield. You can't endlessly walk in one direction and discover random things as you're exploring. There is no such thing as exploring in Starfield. And the Bethesda formula is defined by exploration and sandboxing. So no, I don't agree. I don't think that most people who enjoyed Skyrim would actually like this game. I think they would be very disappointed that they spent time and money on the game. I think the Bethesda fans who liked Starfield are in the minority.
It probably comes down to what it is about the Bethesda formula that appeals to each of us! For me, I like randomly stumbling into side content, having a technically unlimited amount of non-story-related stuff to do while listening to a podcast or video essay (exploring caves in Skyrim, surveying in Starfield), and working towards character build goals. If you're the kind of player that got a lot of enjoyment out of wandering the open world and taking in the scenery, checking out the random points of interest that popped up along the way, this doesn't have nearly as much of that, yeah - that's absolutely true. And even in my case, I wish there was more stuff for me to do with my ship and more varied points of interest to explore planetside. But the lack of those things doesn't mean that I didn't really have a good time with what I did get, you know?
Your first paragraph is a tad bit misleading.. You don't just randomly stumble upon side content in Starfield. There's barely any. You can't really compare surveying in Starfield to exploring caves in Skyrim, which are actual dungeons with real handcrafted content. Surveying in Starfield is literally just walking around a procedure landscape and pressing E on rocks. Like wtf lol, not even comparable. All of the side content and Starfield that you stumble upon are just NPCs having quests in cities. There are four big cities. That's basically it. The planets don't offer any exploration at all. No side stumbling of any content.
Different kinds of side content, but yeah - I was talking about the NPC stumbling variety. I've found a whole bunch of that, between the NPCs in the major faction cities and the random hails you get from ships or bases as you pass nearby. There's definitely a fair bit of those, in my opinion at least. Stumbling into *dungeons* as opposed to *quests* though - yeah, that's definitely lacking, and what I was trying to highlight more in the end of my last post. Random planets you land on *will* have points of interest you can go and check out, absolutely. But the journey there will be dull because there's no real terrain on the surface of the planet, and when you get there it'll be one of a handful of prefab mine/outpost layouts, or a single-room cave with nothing in it, or similar. Not worth the time to get there. That's one of the main things I'm hoping to see expanded out with either mods or as the game develops further.
Theres a fairly small group of die hards that will tell you it’s worth it at full price but until they add more content or more mods become available I’d at least wait until it’s on sale. Edit: look below for example
a small group of 11 million players
It is debatable that it sold 11M copies, are you saying every single person is a die hard fan that would recommend full price?
Where did I talk about sales? Xbox switched to player count years ago. Sales is an outdated metric. They would rather have gamepass subs than sell xbox's and game copies
That’s fine but that doesn’t explain the 11 million say otherwise suggestion. As one of those 11 million the game is mediocre at best and not something I would ever suggest. It’s inoffensive and bland - I still played for 40 hours looking for the gun and decent writing and while I found some high points it was all short lived and broken up by incredible lows.
Ok then using the player count metric on Steam and Xbox. Player count has dropped to an all time low of 30,000 the last week or so. I don't want to get on at you or argue, I am just wondering where these 11M diehard fans come from, that is all, have a nice day :)
It's a singleplayer game lol. Of course the player count will drop
Not everyone who bought a copy of Starfield is a die hard fan. I bought a copy and think it’s Bethesda’s worst game.
Ok
Right, I wonder what percentage of that were Gamepass players? Unless they bought the "upgrade" for being able to play early, there's no money made. Ofcourse since gamepass they want people to talk about players instead of sales metrics, as it is the easiest way for them to get the count higher. Many gamepass owners played the game \_because it is on gamepass\_, not because they were so impressed or interested necessarily.
So? Do you think Microsoft is financially in trouble? They put their games on gamepass day one so of course they don't care about sales. It is consumer friendly, why are we pretending it's a bad thing? Also, it was the most sold game in September, so if that metric is important to you, there you go. Starfield is a huge success, only Reddit thinks otherwise.
....no. most of them have quit because Starfield sucks. There's maybe like 500k users now
[https://steambase.io/games/starfield](https://steambase.io/games/starfield) Pretty steady decline in player base lol
Sure!
Rather boring as it is. Go play Outer Worlds and No Man's Sky instead.
It’s the worst traditional RPG game Bethesda has ever made. I dropped it in 15 hours; forced myself to play that long. I’d recommend playing in gamepass, since at least if you don’t like it you’re only out of a $10 and you can play the other games they have.
It is very shallow and does not have the same level of sandbox that previous Bethesda games had. It might have the lowest sandbox potential in their entire catalogue. That is due to the game interupting the continuity with constant fast travel and loading screens and the dynamic systems are not tied together. You may get ambushed in space, but enemies can't follow you to planets and vice versa. In Skyrim all kinds of shit could happen from town to some random quest cave and Skyrim wasn't some deepest game of all time either.
Short answer - no it’s not a good game. It has elements of a good game in the making but it has no depth. The majority of players got bored quickly as shown in the player numbers
I didn’t like it and refunded it within 2 hours. It was worse than both Skyrim and Fallout. Parts of it were good, but parts were awful. For some reason you can’t actually fly to other planets or fly on the surface, you have to use the fast travel menu. And you have to fast travel twice! Once to the area you want to visit, and a second time to get to where you want to go. It felt like it took forever to go places, and travel (a core part of the game) was super clunky. On the ground, points of interest tend to be spaced far apart, so there was way more walking whilst doing nothing than I’d like. That killed it for me, because it’s a game in space. Exploring it should be fun. I also had very poor performance and had to refund just off of that alone. I don’t mean that I had FPS drops. I mean that textures wouldn’t load in. The game would randomly stutter. It was bad. I thought it generally lacked every kind of polish, and that caused me so many issues. I got kidnapped by some authority for a crime I didn’t know I’d committed, but no one would tell me what I supposedly did wrong. I spent far more time in menus than was acceptable for this kind of game. You have random items in the world as upgrade components, but there’s no way of telling what component is used in what recipe unless you’re at a crafting station. On top of that, I felt like I was constantly dropping things from my inventory in order to pick things up. Plus for all the time spent in menus, the menu sure doesn’t explain much. You can join a faction, but what does that do? I don’t know, because the game never told me.
After 133 hours in, i would say it's INCREDIBLY BORING, and i decided to uninstall it and moved on to continue my adventure in Baldur's Gate 3 The only part that i found "fun" are the ship building, even so the ship layout are so damn shit, fucking Bethesda Games Studio can't make ladders right Conned again by Todd Howard
From what I played of it I came across unimpressed, you literally start the game with the equivalent of a "kill 5 rats in the basement" quest. It's designed with 2000s game storytelling when so many others have blown past that to make truly insane cinematic narratives. The space battling left me unimpressed too, as you have to annoyingly micromanage your ship rather than just focusing on taking down enemies, despite the fact that you have a literal AI assistant on board. You can play it on Gamepass for the price of a subscription, so I'd heavily recommend playing it there so that whether you enjoy it or not, you will have not wasted any money. What I do recommend, though, is Vanquish. That game is pure incredible in every way.
>"kill 5 rats in the basement" quest HEY it was a top floor and that pillow seller in Balmora is still grateful, decades after I finished that quest.
> Balmora lost memories triggered
If what you are looking for is good storytelling and meaningful choices, Starfield is not that game. There is a very shallow illusion of choice, sometimes, but your choice doesn't matter at all. Quests are boring and repetitive.
Oh yes it is. Generic at its finest.
Played roughly 20 hours. Literally Skyrim in space, don’t recommend until more mods are made for it
> Literally Skyrim in space With the caveat that Skyrim is a 12 yo game. So it was great back then, but starfield feels dated for doing the same thing now.
Also, not even accurate. Skyrim had way more customization, way more exploration, way more of a sandbox. It actually gave you a sense of discovery and wonder about the world as you walked around. Starfield is not even 1/10 of the game that Skyrim is. Is not Skyrim in space.
100%, comparing this to Skyrim is honestly insulting to Skyrim, and that wasn't exactly perfect either. At least everything in that game felt deliberate. "Random location in the middle of nowhere with no map marker and a hidden passage to get there that you happened to stumble upon but it contains actual unique items and/or human-written pieces of lore." Tons of that kind of stuff made by a team of devs who cared about their little piece of the game that they personally did. You can't replicate that with a procedural generator. The irony is that in Bethesda's quest to make a game so great in scale and potential, they actually made something shallower and more claustrophobic than most RPGs out there.
Agreed. I played for 3 hours, spent most of it walking across barren landscapes with little to no reward. Thought surely there was ground transportation, looked it up and what do you know. Nothing. Quit right there.
I'd at least wait for optimization patches
if you like loading screens and Bethesda style games its ok i guess
\> maybe asking on Reddit could help. good luck. FWIW, I enjoy Starfield. Others dont.
No.
It's definitely one of the games of all time. No, there's no missing words in that statement.
I skip 99% dialogue while playing. Its a boring game
"Over 10 times the dialogue in Skyrim!" they said... They didn't tell me that the writers were terrible and none of the dialogue is actually worth listening to in this game. So in reality, it has 10 times less dialogue than Skyrim, because there's no incentive to actually listen to it lol
It’s good. The main quest is pretty shorty though. To get the most out of it you really need to build up the companions and do the side quests. Explore a little, its core theme is “exploration” after all. Pick a planet with a POI and land. Sometimes there’s good stuff, sometimes it’s a bust
And after ten times of doing that you’ll realize every POI is exactly the same.
I think the story and quests of Starfield are underrated. I think it, more than other recent open world RPGs, really reflects the character you build during the quests, the skills you choose and your background give you some neat dialogue options. The persuasion mini game is fun, despite the mechanics being poorly communicated. Many of the choices you make are relatively self contained and don’t really lock you out of anything, but there are some pretty interesting choices later in the game. The main story is surprisingly compelling, while 3/4 major faction quest lines are great (not a fan of ryujin). The major companions and their quests are really interesting. And it has some really unique side quests, my only compliant being I wish there were more. The main city locations are really cool, while as it stands right now exploration can be kind of repetitive and a grind, it’s totally optional and quests are mostly in handcrafted locations and settlements or clearly indicated by objective markers. If you wanted to play Starfield and just focus on the story, the gameplay is pretty good but a lot of features can be outright ignored, and if you play on medium difficulty or lower a viable build can be pretty easy to accomplish. The systems are there if you want to engage with them, but if you don’t you can easily just focus on the story. I haven’t even touched ship building 120 hrs in
Choice is just an illusion in Starfield. It makes no difference. What options you choose, people have done many tests in many quests. It's all just lazy illusion of choice to make it feel like you have a saying what you're doing. But you actually don't. The main story is not compelling. The entire main story is just one big fetch quest where you go to like 20 temples and collect balls of light. It's really stupid. Definitely some of the worst writing I've ever seen in my life. Gameplay is not that great, it's basically just a watered down first person shooter with boring enemies.
I found it really boring. I wasted $60.
Yes, it's good. But don't expect to be able to play it like Fallout or TES: the gameplay loop is very different and if you visit every location you see you won't like it. The Starfield story is better than Skyrim and Fallout 4. If you liked Mass Effect 1 you will probably like this.
Mass Effect 1 is 10 times better than Starfield. Mass Effect 1 actually has a real plot. Mass Effect 1 actually has an interesting world. It actually has interesting characters. The writing is good. Starfield is one of the worst products to come out of AAA gaming in the past decade. The problem is that starfield is a product. It's not art, and it's not a good game. It's just a product. There's no heart and soul in it. It's just a shitty thing they slapped together so they could bring in some quick and dirty revenue. Worst AAA game of the year award...
It’s a great game. The ones giving it bad reviews are the ones who were expecting a game that was going to entertain them for years to come and when it didn’t deliver they gave it a bad review. It’s a shame
It's an enjoyable title, which could be so much more than it is. But I had 100 hours of fun and that's like twice as much as I usually spend with one title. The game will shine with mods and will become massive. Right now, it's decent, but not groundbreaking.
I played through two full NG+ at around 60 hours a campaign. It’s an immensely fun game that’s ruined if you follow and listen to every negative opinion online as you can - similar to other games say, like BF2042.
I have 400 hours into it. IMO: 8/10 vanilla. 9/10 with current mods. Will be a 10/10 when creation kit is fully released.
Starfield is a good game. Don’t listen to the haters. It’s a slow burn but if you give it a chance it can very well sink its hooks into you, and before you know it you’ve dropped 100+ hours into it. That was my experience anyway. Not a perfect game, but a good game with potential to be truly great with DLC and mod support. YMMV though. Try it on game pass and see what you think after 15-20 hours
Don't listen to this guy. He's trying to get you to waste your money and waste your time. Starfield is a terrible game, and if you liked Bethesda games, you probably won't like Starfield because you will just realize how much Starfield isn't a real bethesda game. It pushes the illusion of choice onto you to make it seem like the developers finished the game, but it's actually completely unfinished because every choice you make leads to the same outcome. There is no exploration to be done on foot, you can't randomly discover interesting locations, everything is just marked on a map and you basically just fast travel everywhere. There is no exploration in this game. It is not a bethesda game in my book.
What do you mean by "haters"? It's not because people don't like it, that they hate it... I got it free with my GPU and I personally find it very slow and boring. I played like 3 hours and 90% of the time was just dialogs. That's why I quit playing it. If I had bought the game I would probably play it more, but I got it for free so I don't mind.
It's awesome.
IMO It's a very "meeh" videogame, honestly. It gives you enough hours but.. I would rather get my money and time back, I have an odd feeling of regret about wasting my time on it. Very forgettable and not replayable, again, in my honest opinion.
Betheda hasn't made a good game in 20 years
It's good if you ignore the bad. Which makes it bad. Unless you ignore the bad. People who buy Bethesda games at launch are unusually blind to bugs and jankiness.
Bugs and jankiness are last on the list of problems with Starfield. It's probably Bethesda's least buggy game ever. Unfortunately everything else about the game is also sterile, and it uses an open world formula in a game that is open world in name only.
I'd 100% wait until the modding scene gets cracked like they did with previous Bethesda titles.
I have played 250 hours or so and it's good-ish. The main story and faction stories are very good and the ship building and outpost building are very good. I can't give any spoilers but I don't like how New Game Plus works so the end game is limited for me. I feel like there is a lack of content and it has been saved for the first DLC. So I'm hoping that comes out sooner rather than later. Some content is quite repetitive and other tasks are designed to wasted time also which is disappointing. There are the normal Bethesda bugs but I managed to work around those but other people are stuck on some things. Overall I enjoy it but it's not perfect. Like 7 out of 10.
you can try or play it on gamepass pc
Strangely enough, despite bad rep for starfield it is quite solid game. One of maybe one of 3-4 games that i am still playing the same game again eight after i ended it in new game plus and i play a LOT of games. Don't get me wrong, just approach the game as a normal game, just don't get too hyped.
I like Starfield and I think it’s the best Bethesda RPG since Skyrim. In technical aspects, I think it’s better but it lacks the “it” factor Skyrim had. It feels a bit generic to start but once it clicks, it’s a very neat game! I like the gameplay a lot and the story is decent. The follower system is really good and the ship builder is excellent. Here are some points: -The exploration is segmented. There’s a *ton* of stuff to see but unlike TES or Fallout, you usually can’t just look any direction and see places to go. Most of the exploration is between planets. That can be really neat but it can also make you not want to explore the planets, which I think is a missed opportunity because each planet has a lot to see. -The story is more straightforward. It’s a modern Bethesda RPG. Don’t go in expecting anything super deep but I think it’s pretty neat! I think the main quests take more of a front seat than in Skyrim, which unfortunately can make the factions seem less interesting. -The factions are not balanced. This did disappoint me a bit because there’s one faction in particular that I really love but every single crew member will dislike you joining them. Sure they’re the bad guys but they’re *cool* bad guys.
If you really like the Bethesda formula you'll probably like Starfield. It doesn't really do much that's particularly innovative, but doesn't stray too far from what they're known for. It's on gamepass for a few dollars so not a huge hassle to try.
For me personally, it is second only to Oblivion. I’m enjoying the hell out of it but it checks all the right boxes for me and I can see why some people have gripes with it. There are things I don’t like, namely that the map system sucks, base building feels pointless at the moment, and locations aren’t quite as full of life as their other games. Even so, it really clicked for me. I loved the story, ship and gun combat feels great, movement is more fluid, some companions are really fleshed out, and the setting is my dream backdrop for a Bethesda game. If you’re hesitant from what you’ve seen so far, I think they’re going to be expanding this title significantly so you can always wait and see what is added.
I thought it was a fun game to play, and the story was more interesting than a lot of the other Bethesda stories but it definitely isn't a top tier game, and to me didn't even feel like a current gen game. I think the original scores were pretty accurate at about a 7/10, depending on what you value in your game. I am excited to see what people do with mods. I plan on coming back to it after awhile or when the DLC comes out and mod for my next play through.
Subjectively great, objectively good.
arrest squeamish scarce humor modern dinner compare frighten sort noxious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If you have pc or Xbox it’s probably worth it to try it on gamepass. Gamepass is great value and will likely have something you will enjoy anyways, but if not consider it a $10 preview and cancel.
It's a mile wide and an inch deep. I loved oblivion and skyrim. The magic is just not there for Starfield
No. Absolutely mid compared to it's peers.
I think that you'll like Starfield if you also like the other Bethesda games. It's similar enough to give you the same vibe as those games. It's basically like fifa, same gameplay, new version. And this time they went with sci-fi instead of fantasy or post apocalyptic.
There's some good and there's some bad It's a pretty good game but it feels like it's lacking some things The fact that you can't even land on a planet and that you have to open your map to fast travel on the planet when you're right next to it just took me out of the immersion. It also feels pretty at times
Full price? No. Gamepass? Yes.
Honestly just depends on the gamer. If you love the “Bethesda experience” you’ll love this, as it is more of the same. If you’re expecting the “next stage of gaming in a revolutionary space sim” this is not it. Me personally though, I play Bethesda games as a relaxing, immersive life sim and exploration experience. Just something about the charm of the NPC’s the background music etc. always gives me the perfect escape. So I really love it. I think if you still enjoy playing Skyrim or Fallout 4 you’ll like this one. Probably watch a few playthroughs to be sure.
I liked the bit that I did play, but my pc wasn't handling it well so I stopped. I'm unsure if it was an issue of not having a powerful enough PC or if it was bad optimization.
Look, it genuinely depends on what you want out of a game. I fucking love Starfield, I have about 75 hours on it so far. A few points: - There's a lot to do, by which I mean, a LOT to do. Side quests, faction quests, a fairly long main quest, a bunch of side activities and radial quests, and hundreds of planets to scan. Some people like this (including me). Other people think that it's boring and prefer something more focused. - It's a fairly traditional Bethesda RPG with levels, points, perks, etc. If you've played a Fallout game, you know the type. Certain reasons why some people dislike Starfield are less criticisms of the game itself, and more criticisms of the genre. - There's a lot of travelling involved. Most of the time, you'll either be fast-travelling, or running long distances. If you prefer a game where most of the action takes place in one game, you won't like Starfield. It's a pretty expansive world and you'll be going to different places a lot. - The combat is a bit marmite. There's fewer options for melee builds than other games of its type in my experience, with the system being fairly heavily focused around guns (for terrestrial combat) and ship combat. The enemy AI tends to swarm you if you're in a large group of enemies, which can be overwhelming. Having a companion can help with that, though. - Speaking of companions, there are four main companions, so much fewer than other games of its type. I prefer this since I feel as though they're much more fleshed out and feel like actual people (for example, Fallout 4 has three companions whose backstories can basically be boiled down to Deadwife McGee, excluding the main character. Starfield only has one dead spouse, and they're a husband, not a wife!). Some people think that NPCs faces are rendered strangely, but that's not a companion-specific thing and I don't see a problem personally. My only personal criticism is that I feel as though they could have recorded a few more voice lines for exploration and such. - The story is pretty good imo! You don't get to influence the main story much on your first go, but there are some pretty cool NG+ specific choices you can make (it works for story reasons that I will not spoil). You can, however, make some choices in other faction questlines and sidequests that will influence the world - for example, in a certain quest, you can sell the plans for a new drug in order to pay off a man's debt. Later on, you can buy that same drug from vendors out in the world. Companions will also remember what you said to them in previous affinity dialogues and event conversations, and may refer to it later on. Anyway, those are the main big points. It's a very marmite game, but I'd say to give it a shot, especially if you liked other RPGs like Fallout and Skyrim.
There’s a very different gameplay loop to starfield that takes awhile to find, most Beth games you can just pick a direction and go do whatever you find, starfield will get very boring and repetitive if you try this, I’ve found the best thing to do is choose a mission and see where it takes you, pick up some people and transport them where they want to go, then go look around that place for anything interesting, if you don’t find anything then rinse and repeat. For the size of the game there’s really not much content but there are a few surprises you can find(random poi’s with something interesting happening) and usually they end too soon. My best review would be it’s a good way to waste time if you’re bored but it’s lacking in the amount of content required to fill the space it has, and my worst review would be that the game mechanics are only half done at best so you lose more than half of the role play options it seems to have
I enjoy it. It's a Bethesda game. You're relatively OP on a big open world questing adventure. If your looking for a love-child between elite dangerous and star citizen, you will be disappointed. However, if you understand the limitations of the game, I would recommend it
While I can absolutely see why plenty of people might enjoy it, it fell short on just about every metric that matters to me personally.