Starfield

[minteK917]

Thousands of planet, wasent the brag they think it is lol. We know its gona be 99% procedural empty waste. But hey that gives you option to set up your single player bases.

[Fight4Fun]

Gunplay bad
Hud boring
Graphics not impressive
Animations not impressive
Skill system bad and boring (+20% damage? rly?)

Base building and ship constructor looks cool.


Anyway its Bethesda, game will be playable year+ after release with patches and mods.

[Warning]

Thousands of planet, wasent the brag they think it is lol. We know its gona be 99% procedural empty waste. But hey that gives you option to set up your single player bases.

Yep, 1000 planets is a huge red flag. No one's ever even made a single planet sized content dense map. Even if they were extremely ambitious and made a map 10 times the size of Skyrim worth of content, that would be maybe a planet or two if you're stretching it. This is not going to be a 1000 GTA cities worth of stuff. It's going to be at most 1-2 stretched across a 1000 planets. Everything will be procedural repetitive crap or empty. Gunplay also looked kinda mediocre. The only thing that seemed done well was the Ship and Outpost crafting and space combat. Still kinda feel those are secondary to what the actual game should be though so for now I've got this down as another 76/Cyberpunk.

[Rageonit]

Yep, 1000 planets is a huge red flag. No one's ever even made a single planet sized content dense map. Even if they were extremely ambitious and made a map 10 times the size of Skyrim worth of content, that would be maybe a planet or two if you're stretching it. This is not going to be a 1000 GTA cities worth of stuff. It's going to be at most 1-2 stretched across a 1000 planets. Everything will be procedural repetitive crap or empty. Gunplay also looked kinda mediocre. The only thing that seemed done well was the Ship and Outpost crafting and space combat. Still kinda feel those are secondary to what the actual game should be though so for now I've got this down as another 76/Cyberpunk.

Why is it a red flag? It's a number. They could make it 10.000 planets, what's the difference? Do you feel pressured to visit every nook and cranny of every planet and are afraid that you'll be spending most of your time wandering through wasteland?
Planets are empty. It's there to create the impression of a huge universe (something which games like The Outer Worlds severly lacked - you didn't feel you're playing a "space" game, since it was a couple of pre-built locations). Whether it's good or not depends on the actual locations you visit. A planet can have one interesting spot to see and that's enough - all you need is a clear indication of where are the interesting things. I very much doubt you will be forced to walk through entire planets to find that one interactive spot. You'll prolly be able to scan/map a planet to mark what's interesting, and if you're a fan of wandering through nothing, you can still do that.

[Kathandira]

I loved everything I saw in the extended play trailer.

I get that there are folks who feel burned by bethesda games in the past, but I personally never have. I played each game in full without Mods (played they on console before modding was available). I played Fallout 3, 4, and Skyrim for hundreds and hundreds of hours each. Yeah, there were bugs, and one or two that stopped a side-missions progress. But nothing that made any of these games "unplayable" as some would say.

Starfield looks to me like Fallout in Space, and I am all about it. I am totally their target audience, and I couldn't be more excited!

Using the below as it is a decent list of things to comment on.

• Bland art direction.

• Tedious busywork of mining rocks

• Bland, non-diagetic HUD

• Generic overorchestrated soundtrack

• Murderhobo simulator

• HP bars rather than bodyparts

• Generic collect the alien artifacts plot

• Bland skill system "rifle does 20% more damage" perks

I liked the art direction. It isn't the most amazing thing i've seen, but it isn't bad.
I don't mind resource collection for crafting. It is a pretty common thing when crafting is in a game
HUD was ok. Definitely not wild and creative, but it is sufficient.
Bethesda usually has sound tracks that I love, and I expect this game to be the same
Murder Hobo simulator if you wish to play that way. Generally, their games give you options on how you complete your adventures
I agree with this, I'd love to see the body damage system here rather than a flat health bar.
Also I agree, plot seems quite generic. However, that is usually the case in their games for the Main Plot. Usually their side plots are far more interesting
RPG skill trees going to RPG skill tree, lol. I need to see the entire thing before I can really feel one way or the other about it.

And someone else mentioned gunplay. No VATS. So it better feel good, other wise it will feel like artificial difficulty simply due to poor design. We'll have to get our hands on it to truly judge it.

[Zenfoldor]

....sigh....admittedly I am left feeling less good about the game after the recent gameplay reveal.

What I wanted: Skyrim in space

What I got: Bethesda's version of No Man's Sky

That said, I still have hope. I'm not done yet, just hoping that none of the other stuff gets in the way of Space Skyrim.

For future reference, I don't care about building my own anything, customizing my own anything, ect. I just want a good narrative, exploration, ect. I want to play YOUR content, not make my own. This is an RPG folks, not Mario Maker 2. I understand customization is easy/cheap to add and probably a highly requested feature, but why do people even keep requesting features such as design your own spaceship? That is so arbitrary and takes away from actual single player story content, which if it causes the game to drop in review score, will cause many less people to play your lower quality decorating game....and if Bethesda wants to make decorating games instead of wrpgs, I have no idea why MS would buy them in the first place. We want the greatest hits, not the crappy new stuff that still has all the old problems, fallout76 makers, jeez.

[Zelk]

Weird of them to pick space but make it boring as a basis for their new game

[qwerty123456]

I don't recall seeing anything about reputation for races that results in them blockading you, stopping trade with you, etc, in NMS. Just only for the system you're in. I'm looking for something deeper than just "we get disgruntled at you and ONLY in this one system."

They haven't fleshed out basically anything. Derelicts? Cool the first time (only). Crashed freighters? Cool the first time (only). It's still just a bumblefuck around the galaxy and just base build because nothing else you do actually matters or has impact. The universe doesn't feel alive and actions don't feel consequential at all.

Actual story? With what... the atlas update? Still kiddy-pool levels of depth just like it was before.

Expeditions update? Finally the MP we were promised, but expeditions are boring 10/10.

I haven't bothered playing outlaws, but it does look cool FWIW, even though I know it's still only going to be low-depth improvements.

Don't get me wrong, NMS is a great success from nothingness tale, but it's still just a walking sim with no direction, rhyme, or reason. I've logged over 100 hours in it, and got a farming econ set up numerous times to get hundreds of millions of nanites numerous times. I've modded it, edited save files, etc. I've done all there is to do. The game is a vast ocean that's 2" deep the whole time. I'm hoping for way more in that regard.

You didn't say good. And I agree the reps are lacking you basically just talk to a guy in a space station and he gives you shit if you got a rep at a certain rank.

I don't like the story either but finding out your a simulation and trying to either shut it down(or what ever I forget the actual story) or restarting it is alot less generic than a faction fight between 2 human factions and given how generic the art style is in Starfield they probably could have gone for a more interesting plot.

[Fencers]

What is an art style or aesthetic people might enjoy in Starfield? Cartoon-like, pastels, saturated/vivid colors, cell shading, etc.

[Kathandira]

What is an art style or aesthetic people might enjoy in Starfield? Cartoon-like, pastels, saturated/vivid colors, cell shading, etc.

I would like to know the answer to this as well.

For me, it looked like a bethesda game. Which is all I expected.

[baskev]

looks cool.

But i get a major bethesda vibe from it.

This showcase had broken npc models. 1 was even going cross eyed sometimes.

And how they reacted to shooting was also weird. ....so looks to be meh.

And micro transactions. its clear from fallout 76 that they are coming to this game..like to diablo 4. i hate that so much.

[Fencers]

looks cool.

But i get a major bethesda vibe from it.

This showcase had broken npc models. 1 was even going cross eyed sometimes.

And how they reacted to shooting was also weird. ....so looks to be meh.

And micro transactions. its clear from fallout 76 that they are coming to this game..like to diablo 4. i hate that so much.

Bro, most AAA games are going to have microtransactions. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle and the mass market doesn't view them as negatively as the niche user forums and Reddit attract.

[Edge-]

Y'all...what the fuck is the point of 1,000 worlds to explore is most will likely be "filler" content with Marcus telling us about a settlement we need to help?

Brief gameplay they showed was alright. Looks like No Man's Sky with a lot more budget mixed with a lot of what Star Citizen is going for, but in an offline game. Visually it looked nice-ish, but kinda...standard? I dunno, wasn't blown away by anything and the gunplay looked fairly average.

Did they show much uninterrupted gameplay? I saw the video during the showcase and that was fairly obviously hacked together, though I can't tell whether that was to bypass "boring" moments between action vs. them simply needing to create all the content for the video because the game isn't in a state where they could normally grab all the footage. Which would make sense with the delay announced.

I just don't get the "bigger is better" shit, especially for Bethesda given that the last two "bigger is better" attempts largely struggled as a direct result of them trying to prioritize quantity over quality.

Keeping an open mind and all, but Todd can shut the fuck up forever and I'll never believe a word that man says.

[Fencers]

Y'all...what the fuck is the point of 1,000 worlds to explore is most will likely be "filler" content with Marcus telling us about a settlement we need to help?

It works in No Man's Sky because you get a lot to do and the world can be like a personal playground. I have several different race courses, bases, and so on. My kids and I build stuff on weird moons, planets, and space stations, and fly huge fleets around and race lots of vehicles.

I don't think it is necessarily negative that the worlds are procedurally generated as long as one has things they can do on the planets. That's the real question I think; are there enough sub-systems to make the large playground worthwhile?

[Edge-]

It works in No Man's Sky because you get a lot to do and the world can be like a personal playground. I have several different race courses, bases, and so on. My kids and I build stuff on weird moons, planets, and space stations, and fly huge fleets around and race lots of vehicles.

I don't think it is necessarily negative that the worlds are procedurally generated as long as one has things they can do on the planets. That's the real question I think; are there enough sub-systems to make the large playground worthwhile?

Yeah, I'm just skeptical that Bethesda will give us meaningful things to do on all of them, or that it will have a lot of the fun emergent gameplay from NMS given the offline nature of the game (a lot of the fun from NMS comes from seeing what others have built/are doing sharing your stuff off from what I can tell...I suck and don't play it much).

I just hate that Bethesda keeps focusing on scope and size vs. depth. There's a balance for sure, but they seem to consistently prioritize scope and size of their RPG's over making them more densely packed with stories and things that are meaningful. A number of games they and others have made have been hurt to some degree over their ambitions for a "big world" causing problems in other parts of the game that feel half baked or like a lot of concessions had to be made for the "big world".

[DarkAmbient]

No Mans Sky is a shallow grind, there's no real point to anything and gets old very quickly when you discover that the caves, flora and fauna across thousands of worlds all look similar. That's why the 1000+ planets to explore in Starfield is almost certainly not as great as it sounds. Why bother exploring them all when there'll be nothing noteworthy or cool to discover? I doubt Bethesda have developed procedural generation that creates sizeable ruins of unique dead civilisations waiting to be explored and looted.

Graphically Starfield is much better than No Mans Sky though and will have a lot more meat on the bone, so to speak. My main concern is bugs. It's a Bethesda game so expect plenty. Fallout 4 still crashes all the time on the Series S and they're not interested in fixing it.

[Kathandira]

Yeah, I'm just skeptical that Bethesda will give us meaningful things to do on all of them, or that it will have a lot of the fun emergent gameplay from NMS given the offline nature of the game (a lot of the fun from NMS comes from seeing what others have built/are doing sharing your stuff off from what I can tell...I suck and don't play it much).

I just hate that Bethesda keeps focusing on scope and size vs. depth. There's a balance for sure, but they seem to consistently prioritize scope and size of their RPG's over making them more densely packed with stories and things that are meaningful. A number of games they and others have made have been hurt to some degree over their ambitions for a "big world" causing problems in other parts of the game that feel half baked or like a lot of concessions had to be made for the "big world".

I agreed that there is a balance. But there is something immersive about a large world where I am not tripping over quests every step of the way. I do like expansive areas where there is little to nothing. It gives the world a more realistic feel. The wasteland was just that, and would feel really odd if there were more density to the population. Same with Skyrim, not all parts should be inhabitable.

And with outer space, and 1,000 planets, it makes sense that not all will be populated.

But one thing that was lacking in what we saw, was other races of interactable NPCs. If it is all humans that you talk to, that is a pretty big mistake.

[Wonderment2]

I like the "realistic" asethic to the tech.

Not sure I like the fact the weapons are modern day shit with a vague scientific redesign. Feels like manually loaded doubled barrelled shotgun would stop being a shirt when everyone is wearing bulky space suits.

Also the fact the other factions called the Crimson Fleet evil then when we see the Crimson dude he starts sounding needlessly evil doesn't make me hopeful for the writing

- - - Updated - - -

But one thing that was lacking in what we saw, was other races of interactable NPCs. If it is all humans that you talk to, that is a pretty big mistake.

Disagree. Human only (in regards to intelligent race) sci-fi is a perfectly vaild route to take a story. Means humanity doesn't have a reason to stay untied against a common foe allowing for divisions. Also allowing you to focus on human society. Anyway we're probably getting a precursor race based on the relics.

[Nihilist74]

Starfield needs Jedi and sith. Gun combat is boring.

[Edge-]

Starfield needs Jedi and sith. Gun combat is boring.

pls no space magic, space magic sucks : (