A Starfield Review not Curated by Bethesda
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 10. 2023
- This is Starfield. Is it any good? Let's review it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LATEST VIDEO - - ❯ Which Cloud Gaming Service is Best FOR YOU in 2024? - • Which Cloud Gaming Ser...
157 Views - Mar 17, 2024
JOIN THE CHANNEL to get access to special Perks - - ❯ vod.strms.net/j/UCWQZcGDdB252...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEE YOUR NAME IN MY VIDEO DESCRIPTIONS!
LATEST SUBSCRIBER - - ❯ Bean Gang
Subscribe - - ❯ vod.strms.net/s/UCWQZcGDdB252...
LATEST CHANNEL MEMBER - - ❯
Join the Channel - -❯ vod.strms.net/j/UCWQZcGDdB252...
LATEST DISCORD MEMBER - - ❯ ShadySalamander♯0666
Join the Discord - - ❯ / discord
LATEST TIPPER - - ❯
Tip - - ❯ mercury.streamelements.com/ti...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPORT AND MERCH
Merch - doragon.myspreadshop.co.uk/
DroneMask Affiliate Link - dronemask.com/?aff=111
Tip - mercury.streamelements.com/ti...
Ko-Fi - ko-fi.com/doragon86
PayPal - www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_...
Previous video - mylast.video/RMoeCTD
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PODCASTS:
Super PlayStation Brothers - • Super PlayStation Brot...
MASSIVE NERDMIGOS ORIGINAL PODCAST - / @mnopodcast
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EQUIPMENT AND SOFTWARE
Used Across All Videos, Shorts And Streams
-- Hardware --
Sony Playstation 5
Nintendo Switch (2nd GEN)
EPOS B20 Mic
DJI Wireless Levellier MIC
DJI Osmo Pocket 3
Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra
KobraTech Mobile Phone Tripod
DJI Bluetooth Gimble
Samsung Galaxy Tab S9 Ultra
Ulanzi VL49 (Keylight)
-- Services --
Microsoft Gamepass Ultimate
PS Plus Premium
Streamelements Bot
Mercury by StreamElements
-- Software --
In Built PlayStation Broadcast App
In Built PlayStation Recording App
In Built Nintendo Switch Clip capture
In Built Samsung Mobile Screen Recorder
PlayStation SHAREfactory Studio
Kinemaster Video Editor {Android}
Luma Fusion Touch {Android}
DJI Mimo
PRISM Live Studio {Android}
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FIND ME ON THE SOCIALS:
LINKTREE - linktr.ee/doragon86
DISCORD - / discord
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Hry
As someone with close to 100 hours of gameplay (I think I’m around 90-95 total)-you don’t need to play any more than 10 hours of starfield to understand it’s entire suite of features. You’ve seen everything, I promise lol.
For me, the final nail in the coffin which made this game go from "maybe mods will fix this" to "I do not care if it has mods they cannot change what's truly wrong with it" was when I got tired of exploring random planets and decided to see how they recreated our solar system. Made an attempt to land at the largest canyon in the solar system, the one on Mars. And the game gave me a generic orange/red sand somewhat flat landscape with a random scattering of black rocks and a generic factory and silo 300 meters away in a straight line. This isn't even what Mars really looks like, why would I play a game who tries to claim its "NASA-punk" when it didn't even bother to incorporate what NASA has learned into it? Within an hour of exploring the sol system, I never wanted to see another random generated thing at all. Anyone who tells you to play this game for longer than an hour is simply shilling for Bethesda and wants you to miss out on your return game window.
It really does feel like an outdated slog, especially after playing something like RDR2. "Surface-level busy work to artificially inflate playtime numbers" is spot on. And there's plenty I'd love to do, like building out my ship or a base, but in both cases the sheer number of requirements to do either is seemingly insurmountable. Ship parts not available unless you're a certain level, the inability to build nice furniture without "researching" interior design. The need to find or buy dozens of materials before you can do anything. It's madness. Nobody has time for that. I may pick it up again after mods are available to unlock a kind of "creative" mode, but for now it's simply too frustrating.
It feels like you need like MMO devotion to your character creation in Starfield, when RPG playstyles are more like experiments in play style most of the time. In most of the RPGs I play casually I start a new character everytime. But you are right the devotion to build out the character in order to play the game that way is too much.
I've been playing this game at a snail's pace, and everything you mentioned has not been a roadblock at all, it's just something to look forward to. You just have no patience any more. Games have conditioned you to want everything immediately.
@@gavinpowell4607 You're totally right!
It feels like they spent 90% of the development time making sure the planets were pretty and a seamless POI integration. This means they spent way less time on, you know, interesting weapons, armor, legendary effects, ships, ship building, UI refinement, QOL things, story and characters.
But hey, 1000 planets right?
I get the outdated label.. but I wish it just did a bunch of things Fallout NewVegas did design wise. (I haven’t actually played StarField, just things I’ve seen in reviews about being linear with many unkillable characters etc)
So I've put 300+ hours into the game and 100% it so I could make comments like this. The game is boring, building an outpost means nothing, building the ship means nothing, levelling means nothing because the ai levels with you. Basically you are a delivery boy that has the inconvenience of killing the odd NPC.
The enemy scaling is not a 1/1 with your character. You can be lvl 60 and fight a lvl 5 enemy or a lvl 75 enemy. Just from this alone I don't believe a single thing you said in your comment and that you are full of shit and are factually just wrong or you're lying. Most likely you're lying to seem cool to others.
Nice...... you dont need to put 300hrs, to copy paste everything that haters say ......😂😂😂, and y would somebody put 300+ hrs in a game they find boring???😂😂😂 And 100% in 300 hrs? Lol ya right..... either you're lying, or you straight up bolted through almost everything..... bruh.... i got 320 hrs still have loads to do and see.... haven't even got into outposts yet..... yah... its clear, you're straight up capping
You put 300 hours into a game you find boring just so that you could post this comment?
You couldn't have found it boring
You put 300 hours into the game and it’s boring? Yeah ok
as expected, the schrodinger's critique denial demonstrated here by fanboys. can't critique you played for a little; can't critique if you played for a lot.
"i played for a couple of hours and it's unbearable. it's trash and I'm not gonna play it"
"you barely played the game your opinion is invalid"
"I played through most of the main story and it's boring"
"the game gets good after 15-20 hours, that's not nearly enough time to assess the game"
"I completed the main story and went through trying to find fun in this godforsaken game by completing every side mission I could find. I even tried NG+ because people kept saying it gets better with following playthroughs. 300 hours later it's still not fun."
"if you played it for that long it must have been fun"
fucking take a critique, you donkeys.
also it probably took 300 hours because it 50 hours of it was just loading and cutscenes plus 200 hours of running from POI to POI with nothing happening in between. so that would've been a 50 hour run in any modern game that was properly designed.
Played the game for 3 hours for the first day. When the machine runs out of money, I have to run to the nearest shop to sell my stuffs. In the process, I have to take 2 rests because running out of oxygen. So I tried Alt-Tab or check on my skill menu, found out the game will pause which stops the oxygen from recovering. The game forces you to stand there doing nothing just to recover oxygen, like wtf. Quit the game after that.
Second day, I gave the game another chance. Quit the game after an hour and never go back.
Soooo have you tried to walk slowly to regain oxygen? You should delete this comment because this is absolutely the stupidest thing I’ve read about a game. Blame yourself not the game
@@solidsnake3962 Of course I did. Walking do not recover oxygen when you are encumbered. It is faster to just wait for oxygen recover to full then make a full run. Or you saying players are obligated to know the oxygen exploit and players who don't are stupid? I can play the game anyway I want, who are you to tell me how should I play the game? This is one part of the problems that prevent me from going back to the game. There are plenty of problems, I just don't want to waste my time listing out all the problems here. The game have massive design flaws, keep on defending Starfield Bethesda fanboi.
@@Jamgcy well you said you weren’t playing so me telling you how you should play the game shouldn’t matter. In 5 hours you couldn’t have possibly seen many “problems” because you barely played the game. If you don’t like it then yea don’t play it. The problems with the game for you though is whatever some CZcamsr tells you the problems are. That’s ok tho you keep on hating, you do you.
Also walking slowly, does recover oxygen. Or aiming and walking. Also you won’t die even while sprinting so if you can sprint to where you need to go and then rest at a bed your got to go. Like I said it’s a you problem not the games.
@@solidsnake3962I believe that the game is called "Starfield" not "wait and catch my breath simulator". Bethesda fans already do that in real life
Not finishing a game should probably speak more to it's quality than completing it. It's like if you order a chicken dinner and send it back because the chicken was raw, of course you're not going to finish it.
Flawed analogy.
It's more like you ordered chicken & after a few bites you realised you'd have preferred steak instead.
@@skyriminspaceFlawed analogy.
Steak is good, Starfield is not.
@@AntivenomOWSnoozeField
I have two reasons for not finishing a game.
1. Its a shit game.
2. Its to good and i don't want it to end.
unpack that.
@@skyriminspace no, I stand by my analogy. I want the chicken, but the chicken I got is uncooked, there's still feathers in part of it, and of you listen really close it's still clucking
Starfield: Sixteen times the loading screens.
🤣🤣
Great review. I wish you'd adressed where the hell 10 years worth of developement went on this game. MI Andromeda did this level of work in 9 months and that was the C team on a rush with bad engine experience.
And, credit where credit's due, it actually has a better story, too. 🤣
Good grief, we live in some dark times. Bethesda Game Studios is so trash now.
I mean, we all watched its decline over the years, like watching a car crash in slow motion, but many of us held out hope that, by some shere happenstance, they would take the innumerable, well-crafted critiques to heart, actually learn from their mistakes, and iterate and improve upon their game design. But it didn't happen, and this boring, gray slop of a game really puts it in stark relief.
Here's the thing: That is an exageration. Is like saying James Cameron was making Avatar since the 90s which is clearly wasnt. They got the time to work on Starfield after Fallout 4 development. So a 5 or 7 years of development. But overall, some rework here with a graphics engine here I heard, and then some, the team isn't exactly talented at this scope sadly. There is a reason Star Citizen took them 10+ years to have anything... Altho they were making two games at the same time, but still, a space game was asking too much for the type of Workload and "talent" Bethesda could offer.
No SF achieved what ME:A was trying to do. Remember when they said they were going to have(don’t remember the number of planets) and they had to keep lowering the amount of planets until we got 7. People complained that those planets were empty. Also it was in development for 5 years they built the bulk of the game in 18 months. Don’t know where you pulled 9months out of
IKR
Yes. A mistry. Bethesda really need a new engine...
I played about 3 hours and never will go back to it. Im surprised people say that we cant hve opinion because we havent played enough. Do you really have to taste shit to find out it is shit?
I feel the same way about Spiderman. Shits ass.
I legitimately laughed at this XD
It's ridiculous. I know sone people spend every minute they aren't at work gaming so spending 100 hours on a game they aren't that into to get to the good part is whatever but my time for a hundred hours in a game... Maybe once a year? And Bethesda was able to get that from me for Fallout 3 but lost it by Fallout 4 (and I liked New Vegas better than 3 once fully fixed as w sidenote.)
I have maybe 6 hrs and a £1500 self build set-up for a game I stopped playing and went back to Skyrim.
Starfield is boring and ‘very diverse’ making it even more un relatable.
Wow! Just wow! This is the most honest and comprehensive review i have watched of Starfield. I have watches at least 30. I installed the game day one. Now I'll be upfront. I am more of a fantasy guy than a sci-fi guy, so my opinion make serve less. However, I played it for maybe 5-7 hrs and came to the exact conclusion. It is 'meh'...There is some much that is outdated. I won't say everything here for fear of being redundant. But, man. You hit the nail on the hed. Instant subscriber from this video. Keep it up!
i *obtained* this game early because i COULDNT WAIT to play it, a day and a half later on release day, i had absolutely no interest in keeping it installed, or purchasing it.
It was such an overwhelmingly bad experience, i would rather go back and play skyrim for the millionth time.
Heck, even the opening of Skyrim is fun.
@@jonathanwessner3456I rather replay the skyrim's main quest rather than replaying starfield's main quest
To prepare myself for Starfield I played Skyrim for 3 months. I was having a blast with skyrim. Finding new stuff and experience each time I played. Then Starfield came out, I felt deceived. Gameplay and product was aweful. Bugs, poor game mechanics, nothing engaging. I tried to play more since everybody said it is gonna be better. I played maybe 15 hours more then uninstalled the game. I couldnt take it anymore. It is just a bad game no matter how you try to sugarcoat it!
@@JonathanHebert Heck, just compare the openings of the two. Skyrim teaches you more, and gives you a better idea of the story. Everything up to the gunfight in Starfield could have been less interactive, and been like the lead up to the "release" in Skyrim, when the dragon attacks.
@@jonathanwessner3456wtf are saying lol
i have about 9 days in SF and on NG+. It's pretty much meh 100% all the way through. My biggest disappointment is not being able to explore astronomical accurate planets. I was really hoping to see the outrageous geology of the moon Miranda, that we know exists from satellite probes, but in the game it just has a bit bumpier terrain than most of the other moons. IRL it has mountains and valleys differing in 8+ miles of altitude, ridiculous cliffs that drop down for miles. I wanted to see that up close in the game. But it's just basically another barren same-same world. I was hoping you could build an ice piercing moonpool on Europa to construct submarine exploration vessels that let you explore the seas under the ice, to get maybe like a mini-Subnautica, but no. All we get is a 1 acre crack in the ice where you can scan it and see something that looks like seaweed growing in it. Wow. Gee. I wonder what strange life must live down there. I guess we'll never know because there's no ocean exploration in SF. You can explore oceans in NMS, even if they're not very deep, but at least you can go in the water and use a sub. SF is so disappointing. The only part that's fun is the gun combat and the reason why I stopped playing is I finally got bored with the combat, and since there's not much else, that's it. I'm done with it.
When I heard that the Bethesda execs were taking their payouts from the merger and leaving the company, I finally realized what Starfield was: the Contractually Obligated release. The very minimum to be considered a game, then running out the door with their golden parachutes.
what a bunch of slop nonsense - any "data" to align with your preconceived ideas and wants, right? You must love Fox News. Also, bethesda execs dont make games, and they never have - they DID try to shove live service down a bunch of developers throats and you see the results of that, which were not good.
This game is the epitome of: good enough for game pass.🤷🏼♂️
@@norcodaev game pass is the only reason I play the game 😂
@@austinpierce7313 Awesome! Thanks for contributing to the downfall of my favourite pass time! You’re the best, Austin! I mean, who wants good games anyway?!
@@norcodaev oh yeah because the fact game pass and Xbox live are tied together has nothing to do with it. Why would I pay $20 less a year to not have a stupid amount of games? Go outside and enjoy something dude
Facts. That's how I felt about the first hour. The graphics are awesome... But I just wanted to go back to playing No Man's Sky.
I'm going to force myself to pick it up again, but I'll be surprised if it improves. The loading screens to enter the ship or that first building on the moon are just jarring.
While I agree with your assessment that the introduction is slow- something not atypical of any Bethesda RPG, for what it's worth- I have to disagree with the rest of your review of Starfield as a basic, lackluster title. I find Starfield to be very engaging with a lot of depth and complexity, and have been enjoying my time in it. I didn't find Fallout 4 to be engaging enough to continue with past the first few hours, but nobody would argue that was a bad game. It just wasn't for me. It sounds like Starfield wasn't for you, and that's fine. But I don't think it's fair or accurate to call it a bad release.
‘Depth and complexity’
Care to elaborate?
To be fair to myself here, I do say within the video that "it isn't a bad game by any stretch of any imagination". The actual gameplay and, from my console experience, construction of the title is solid and generally enjoyable; except the button bindings which are weird and far too complex to try and adjust. My assessment was that it isn't a game that I can recommend at all, which while carrying similar connotations to "it's a bad game" isn't the same thing. Again as mentioned in the video, my boredom could be someone else's joy, and even my negative take on aspects could say that this is a title for them when they watch it.
I'm glad you liked/are liking the game and hope you can continue to take joy from it.
@@Jupa for sure. Ship building and systems management have been a real highlight for me, along with weapon and suit crafting/upgrading. I really like the implementation of the skill trees as well where in order to upgrade a particular skill you have to actually specialize and use it instead of just earning and spending enough points to reach the next tier. That imitation of practice and growth feels refreshing to me as a player. On that note, the diversity of the skill trees can lead to completely different styles of play, and by extension, completely different experiences in game. I leaned into ship and ground combat mostly, whereas a buddy of mine focused on science and stealth, and when comparing our experiences it seems like we have been enjoying two totally different experiences of the game which I find very compelling. Also I've been finding a lot of interest in the way that NG+ functions narratively. Each time I've started a new playthrough with my acquired skills and memories but get to experience a clean slate, the universe feels like it gets a little bigger in spite of my character being significantly more powerful. Those are a few of the examples as to why I don't think the game should be described as bad- it just didn't click for some, which is fine.
Low standards and the excuses and celebration on mediocrity is what makes gaming a boring chore and gives us more trash like this game... and it's fan who might just be braindead or the easiest ppl to satisfy.
I also really enjoyed this game and I found the world and lore and factions to be deep and interesting. I dont agree that the game "only gets good" after 30 hours. I got dragged into the crimson fleet straight away and that quest was awesome. Then I tried to get on with the main story and ended up fighting teramorphs for hours more. Yes, plenty of the game is shallow and undeveloped. Obviously Bethesda are creating a foundation upon which to build. There is definitely enough fun here for the pricetag. Anyone who says "after 100 hours i got bored" has had their money's worth. And I will be delighted to play expansions and dlc as they come. I love starfield. And I am excited about what it will become.
I have put about 100 hours into starfield. There were some really good moments in that gameplay however there was also a lot of meh moments of gameplay. I still enjoyed it but I’ve moved on and I’ll come back in a year or two when mods have enhanced the game
This is the proper way to enjoy a game. Just play it, enjoy it, and move on. All these people crying from the rooftops and making videos is crazy.
why does a $200 million game have to rely on modders thats my question
@@gavinpowell4607maybe because it’s deserved. You meat gobbling Bethesda won’t change the fact that the game is mid and the devs know this.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but in my opinion, calling a lack of accessibility features in a video game "discrimination" is a bit of a stretch for me.
-edit spelling.
If this had been an anonymous game on game pass (“fun in space” maybe), I’d have left after those first 8/10 hours and never pick it up again. I only persevered to level 40 because I so wanted it to be good. But my soul said that if we had to fetch just one more bloody artefact we’d shrivel and die. I agree with everything you say. I’d be surprised if even the modders can save it. I’ll come back at Christmas and see if it looks any better.
I fear there wont be a modding community. If the guys making mods arent having a good time, they're just going to go back to fallout and skyrim. Wouldnt you?
@@jackblaisdell4097 There will be a mod community because people are desperate to make this slop work. People seem to be in denial that this game is completely surface level, calling it an rpg is an actual joke no options matter literally nothing you do makes a difference. Tbh bethesda fans have been in denial since Skyrim a game which I do like but was already not really an rpg in the true sense since very little mattered in that but at least Skyrim had a very beautiful and fun world to explore, reading books and checking out locations felt rewarding unlike this game which is just pointless.
I finished the game and I can confirm that this review is fair and honest.
Bethesda should be putting their focus into releasing the creation kit, so people that care can make Starfield into what it should've been.
Two separate issues. Yes, Bethesda needs a new engine and shame on them for releasing a 'new' game without one. The creation kit is what the community needs to fix the game they released.
@@ginnykmeyer8860How about we don't fix a game from a lazy despicable game studio? Starfield deserves to die and Bugthesda along with it. We gamers won't lose anything from this outcome. Give money to hard working and passionate developers, not to hacks.
@@Shadowhunterbg My mom had a saying for situations like this: opinions are like assholes -- everybody has one.
You undercounted the loading screens and cut scenes involved in traveling from planet to planet. At it's longest: click on airlock door to enter - loading screen - make your way to the cockpit and click on the pilot's chair to sit down - cut scene - hold a button to take off - cut scene - once in orbit, open your menu to open another menu to select a star system . . . to open a menu to travel to the system - cut scene - if you're at the wrong planet, open your menu to select the planet you do want, then open the menu to travel to the planet - cut scene - select a landing spot - cut scene - get up from the pilot's chair - cut scene - walk to the airlock and click on the door - loading screen.
That's seven interruptions to the flow of the experience. The way to get around that is to just fast travel from the surface of the first planet.
I don't think I've seen a positive review of this game and I can see why. I haven't played this... Game... Yet. And at this point, I don't think I will. It just looks so boring and outdated.
I appreciate this review and honesty. If people are genuinely happy with the game then that's great, do what makes you happy. Me? I doubt I will touch this game unless it is on a very heavy sale, or I just won't pick it up, period.
Edit: If this is what a current Bethesda game is supposed to be, I am absolutely dredding what state ES6 is going to be released in...
22:48 Even if you want something " mindless" to pick up after busy work for an hour, Starfield also lacks in that department because it constantly steal your time with loading screens and cheap/ unfulfilling activities... The sense of achievement just isnt there...
I don't think it's that bad of a sign not to finish a game. I honestly think I haven't finished Morrowind back then, even though I played it for probably 500 hours, and it was extremely memorable. The problem I think is it's simply a shit experience to play Starfield, at least after the first 10-20 hours, when players start to realize that the game has no proper procedural systems, they'll just encounter the exact same copy-paste POIs at every landing site, that the outpost building is superficial, unfinished and messed up (with respect to resource routing), and that generally there is no actual depth or nuance to discover.
Starfield pains me because I was a Bethesda fan since Morrowind and I'm madly in love with everything sci-fi and space, yet Starfield has been the most bland and boring gaming experience I've had in my adult life. It feels like a cash grab designed by people who never held a controller in their life.
It is buggy AF. I constantly get a blank screen with active HUD after a transition or this weird split screen thing where half the screen is blank with two seperate squares (almost looks like a VR bug but I'm not playing VR) showing a left and right cutout of what should be displayed fullscreen. I get screen tearing during transitions all the time. I'm running a system with Ryzen 5600X/3060/32gb RAM. Its up to date with current video drivers running windows 11. I've noticed that 99% of the space suit mannequins do not appear to be attached to a loot table and contain the exact same starter/common space suit pieces with no variation at all regardless of level or difficulty settings. The default key bindings on PC are also weirdly unintuitive and not ergonomic. In one menu you have to hit tab to back out in another it will be esc and in another it will be x. Having to learn nuance in navigating inventory, building, and loot menus in the same game is a bit frustrating. The TAB menu takes unusually long to open and is one of the least used menus during gameplay. I've really only ever used it to select crew and the other "thing", but its constantly being accidently opened because as stated before its used to back out of some menu options. I'm still playing it though...maybe the Navy broke me more than I realized...
I was so excited for this, huge mass effect trilogy fan so I was really looking forward to a space RPG with open world style gameplay. Thanks to reviewers like you for saving me from wasting my money ❤
To me the game reminds me of Mass Effect 2. Just saying
@@andreasoberg2021 its a fucking joke right?
Not a joke. I mean character driven adventure in space. Mass Effect was more dramatic and had cooler combat but Starfield has more to do so I play more
@@andreasoberg2021more to do? As in getting meat for the 100th time from some settlement in an unknown planet?
@@Rifky809 Mostly just the amount of quests. I mean yes I think Mass Effect 2 was an incredible game, this one is maybe not quite as good, but I do like that there are just so many quests to do.
Great review mate. Having forced myself to finish the game and start NG+ I can safely say aside from the very occasional funny moment it does NOT improve. It has none of the replayability of even past Bethesda titles and as your save file grows on Xbox the load times just keep getting longer. I wanted to enjoy it but Mass Effect was a whole order better. At least I actually cared about my crew mates on the Normandy and they each had personality, not like the cardboard cutouts in this game. Luckily I played it with Game Pass and did not actually waste my hard-earned on it 🙂
Love the quality of your audio, keep up the good work!
19:05 I wouldnt be that harsh about missing accessabilty options. Yes most Playstation games do it better these days and these options are great for " normal" players also. But I wouldnt rule out a game completely just because of a lack of options. Thats said, I aggree with most of you other points of this review :)
Had similar reaction. It felt over the board to assume that Bethesda just decided intentionally to not have better accessibility options and wants to discriminate against people with disability... Accessibility options are basically bonus, not requirements for games in general. Its really nice to see game with extensive one, but like... Taking out pitchforks just because one doesn't have all possible options is just... Silly...
And yes, I do agree with everything else what was said in this video, Starfield is just... Meh...
So replying to both of you. I have addressed this point in many other responses, but that response is easily missed so I'll say it here for you guys as well.
Neglect is still discrimination
Just because they either didn't think of it
or struggled to put it in, or it's not industry standard etc etc, doesn't make the lack of accessibility any less egregious or discriminatory.
To give you a more tangible example. If you and I were to build a new public space and have beautiful marble stairs leading into it from every direction, because of the aesthetic and durability, we'd be called out for discrimination
as we hadn't factored crutch, wheelchair or mobility device users into our access plans.
In this scenario we hadn't thought outside of the long term wear or aesthetics, it wasn't a purposeful oversight, but those actions are still
discriminatory by neglect. They still say to less able people "You're not welcome here", because they can't get in. Not words you or I have said, but it is the message the design choice sends, loud and clear.
It is the same ethos in this game and video game development in general. I doubt the discrimination is conscious or purposeful. But by definition and law, it is still discrimination by neglect and that should be called out.
I have people in my circle who need
accessibility settings to play at all. l'm close to it, aware of the crushing impact a lack of those settings has on the player. I'm going to address it in my reviews. If you come back for
a future review, you're welcome to skip over that section if it doesn't sit right with you.
“America crowns world champions for domestic sports…”
That is fucking hilarious, and so true! 🤣🤣
I bailed after 15 hours thinking "I have no motivation to go through these quests or to explore these worlds". I don't know if it's because the quests had started to feel repetitive or because the load screens removed the immersion for me. Also, the third person running animation looked awful to me. I won't rule out going back to the game, but won't justify paying £60 or subscribing to Game Pass just to play it.
So many challenges in the way of the supposed good stuff! And the load screens... So many
I had exactly the same experience. I just couldn't see a reason to continue, as real exploration just didn't exist for me.
I’m a crack head that uses bing on my work computer and I just realized I can get game pass and play starfield without having to pay anything so I’ll be doing that this winter when I have time off
I also hate the "overencumbered" mechanic in lots of games. The FIRST mod I install in all these games is one that disables weight limits. Just let me collect whatever and don't make me micromanage my weight.
Micromanagement! That's exactly what this and previous Bethesda games are all about. They're crazy making.
I like the from soft style of collecting stuff. Nothing adds to your weight unless you equip it so it can actually be used by designers to create trade offs in let’s say damage for speed!
It's part of the fun guys. The game was made that way for our enjoyment.
Plus, you can always take perks to make your character into superman if that's your idea of fun.
the inventory is a part and parcel of the character of the game, there are a lot of issues with the game, yet this one imo is just a feature of it if you played their other games, you always have to manage the inventory and loot. Also the skill perks, having played bsg you know you need lockpicking, medicine, storage and acrobatics/athletics. There are a lot of other skills you need too, here I have a problem, leveling them up is a chore.
@@skyriminspace I guess I just don't find any of that enjoyable anymore. It's kinda sad, really. 😥
After 60 hours of trying to like Starfield, it's made me realize just how amazing Cyberpunk 2077 is.
After years of patching what was a dumpster fire of a released game, yeah, I hear Cyberpunk has turned into a really good game.
Cyberpunk 2077 will never be amazing because it was advertised as an open world RPG with meaningful choices and a living/breathing world, after 3 years of patches, what people got was a good looter shooter with slight RPG elements and a world with nothing going on of value besides side-quests/main quests.
@@inputfunnyI can tell you haven’t put time into the game and just regurgitating what people said on launch.
Yeah, only took them 3 years to make it worth playing. Game was a dumpster fire at launch and a black mark on CDPR reputation that will haunt them for years to come. I wont ever buy a CDPR game near launch again, lesson learned.
@@Belligerennt The game was a scam plain and simple, not only at the advertizing area but also as a product. It came as one of the most broken videogames in history wich even after 3 years of patches is still incomplete and broken in many levels under its hood. All the reactivity and roleplay promised on day one hasn't been implemented yet, nor the funcionality of a game properly tuned for mass consumption.
If we leave aside the fact that the consumers at the console market got litteraly gang raped by CDPR at launch day, the game still comes way short of what was promised for years. The point is that 2077 only has about 30% of what they told us it would come with, this is after 3 years of patches wich most of them have been bug fixes due to the massive backlash that has been happening since the game launched.
If they want to improve this game tremendously, they should add an arcade cabinet into the game that has Skyrim on it.
I bought it before launch, but haven't started it yet. I just haven't seen or heard anything to make me want to play it while I await STALKER 2 and the inevitable heroic work of the Starfield mod community. It looks like a fantastic sandbox for the imaginative and creative modders! I'll wait.
As always a super high quality and realistic review. I've been holding off on this as don't have gamepass right now and seeing your review among others tells me I should continue to wait before signing back up
Isn’t gamepass kindve essential for Xbox? I own a pals4 and was thinking of getting an Xbox for this game. Other Xbox exclusives don’t interest me that’s why I don’t own one
@@j0nnyism if you have an Xbox I imagine so, but I don't have one so can't say for definite. I use gamepass on my laptop or tablet to play Xbox games ,so I sign up and cancel as required
@@j0nnyismdon't buy an xbox just for starfield...
Not curated by Bethesda title trying to be cool yet 9/10 Starfield reviews are the exact same way and say the exact same things. It's pretty funny to watch the crowd
As someone else pointed out in another comment thread - Bethesda took the most-hated Skyrim quest - "Stones of Barenziah" - and made it the main quest of Starfield...
After over 50 hours with Starfield, I think it CAN be a fantastic game, but you need to play it a specific way in the EARLY game to enjoy it due to how the features and perks work, and the role the planets play.
First of all, stick the main story missions for at least 10 levels or so. That'll basically serve as a taste tester and get your oriented with the main cities. You'll also quickly unlock skill points which I'll get to in my second point. Also, this is important, familiarize yourself the menu systems, how to get to your mission menu, how to manage inventory, how to fast travel without using the starmap (just use the mission menu) and just get used to the menus. You'll be using them a lot, but it will help you get to the good stuff fast and now waste time. Sorry, get used to fast travelling, this is THE way to play this game.
Second, for an enjoyable early game that gets you set up to do well in the rest of the game you SHOULD use your first 10 skill points for Booster Pack, Security, A non-melee weapon type of your choice, Weight lifting, Piloting/targeting. This will allow you to actually play the game properly with basic functions now being available to you that should be available from the get-go...
Third, DO NOT just go off immediately exploring planets thinking that you're going to go on some epic adventure. Not yet... After completing about 10 levels of story missions, start branching into faction storylines and things like companion quests. Not only are there awesome missions and stories here, but you'll start getting alot of adjacent random missions in classic Bethesda style, some of which you'll stumble across are great. Of course, finish the campaign whenever you want at this point, but make sure you get all the other faction missions, companion mission, and other proper adjacent missions.
Fourth, now that you have a good foundation for seemingly endless GOOD (or at least acceptable) missions to complete, start exploring the planets. about 160 planets are interesting, have life on them and "landmarks" like cool bases, and interesting missions either on the surface in the orbit of these planets. That other 1400 or so planets exist purely for the purpose of resource mining, outpost building and ticking off your "exploration" boxes. These planets are virtually pointless unless you start getting into late game content like building your own bases and setting up supply chains of resources and trading etc.
Unfortunately, the way the game was marketed, most people seem to get eager to explore planets, and that absolutely ruins the early game (however many hours you waste). If you play the game as I suggested you will have fun gameplay, get tons of good missions one after another, and you will naturally start getting into ship building and base building in your late game, which won't be frustrating at that point since you'll have late game perks and resources/money to be able to do that sh*t properly.
Starfield is a fantastic RPG, but not if you play it the way Bethesda wants you to, you'll probably get bored and frustrated before the good stuff comes. Also, if you don't want to do this or think you shouldn't have to play a specific way to enjoy the game... fair enough, that's Bethesdas fault not yours. This is how I quickly realized I needed to play, and it brought the game from "waste of time" to "addicting Bethesda Style RPG." Not their best work, but not their worst IF you don't get lost in the weeds.
Hmm just from your first sentence, " you need to play it a specific way in the EARLY game to enjoy it due to how the features and perks work, and the role the planets play", does that really sound like good game design? A good game shouldn't need to be played with so many conditions for it to be good, that's just giving it excuses. Maybe it's a good foundation for it to be good but they chose to release it in this state, so of course it should be judged
@Fuzboy I mention that in my post. That being said, there is a great game in Starfield. There's also a mediocre game in Starfield, lol. But there isn't a bad game.
Good review I'll try this route after it goes on sale, I refuse to play full price!
I won’t be playing this for a while.. any suggestions for future modders how game design could set the player on this course without instruction?
(Obviously this would be far too big a change, but from what you describe, perhaps the player should not have even initially been captain of their own ship. You join as a crew member and sometimes you can advise the captain to affect destination, but somewhere around level 10 the captain dies in a dramatic scene and passes the role to you)
After reading your points, I can't help but feel each point isn't a point in the game's favor, for numerous reasons. Like, I get this is a guideline to get further along in the game to the point where it becomes fun, but it feels like a huge ask of the average hobbyist to follow these steps for however many hours they need to. To ask someone to just keep digging to find the gold when the gold promised is buried under garbage, a lot of people will stop digging after an hour or so because it isn't worth it. I agree, Starfield isn't as bad as some CZcamsrs are saying it is (there's a guy doing reactions of other people's opinions on Starfield and that's literally his whole channel, like 3 - 4 videos a day of just react content SSSniperwolf style), but I don't think we can hold it against people for not thinking the first slog is any fun.
Your first point: According to online sources, many people get to level 10 after 10+ hours of gameplay. That's 10 hours in a Bethesda game not doing the things Bethesda games have conditioned us to do since the days of Morrowind, if not earlier, which is to say doing whatever you feel like. Additionally, familiarizing yourself with the menus is vital for Starfield because this inventory system is arguably the worst they have ever crafted in any game *ever*. Full stop. They sold Starfield in the gameplay reveal the same way they did Skyrim with "You see that X? That's not a backdrop, you can literally go to X and explore it." The game is more menus than game for a lot of players, and that'll increase the time it takes to get to 10. That's a really big ask when the UI is a huge drop in quality.
Your second point: The idea that you *have* to invest skill points into very specific skills in order to just enjoy the game is poor design. As a gamemaster for Tabletop games, if a skill is required, I don't tell the players "Your pool of points to buy skills? 40 of those *must* go into Fighting/Brawl." Instead, I just tell them to bring the base of the skill that is required for the adventure I'm running up to the skill level. I don't punish the players for picking wrong skills because it isn't fun for them; instead, I ensure they have a chance to succeed at the start. Sadly, there are, in fact, useless skills in the skill tree, including things like melee which I figured would have been at their best design, not their worst. If to enjoy the game I need things like Booster Pack or Piloting/Targeting, why is a baseline experience of that skill not provided to the player on the outset as it has been in previous Bethesda titles, such as Lockpicking in Skyrim being accessible but Digilocks not being accessible on the outset?
Your third point: Kind of wild that your advice in a Bethesda RPG, traditionally kings of open-world design in terms of designing encounters, is to ignore those encounters and things that interest you and come back to them later. I mean, can you imagine telling that to a new Skyrim player? "No, you have to follow the story. That cave guarded by bandits? Don't go there; just follow the waypoint until you hit around level 25. Ignore those thieves and the Assassins that kidnapped you, just go back to the story. The fun is coming soon, I promise." If your advice for the newest Bethesda RPG is to not explore, Bethesda failed in what they have made a name for themselves in: A true, open world experience.
Your fourth point: You state that 160 planets are interesting while 1400 planets exist purely for resource mining and hold little to no interest until the endgame. That, to me, is abysmal game design. 90% of the planets in this huge galaxy of an experience are pointless to visit? While I get that's realistic in the grand scheme of space, why not move dwindle it down to 200 planets, make the exploration of those planets more vast and hand-crafted, and refine the experience? If someone brought you to an arcade that was being advertised as "5000 sq ft. of FUN!" and you walked in and only 500 sq ft. of space was dedicated to game cabinets and the other 4500 sq. ft. was literally just a concrete floor, you'd probably be pretty let down. You might have fun at those cabinets that *are* there, and I wouldn't deny that, but other people would walk in, look around, and go get their money back because it's an empty experience. *You* see the 500 sq ft. of games, others see the 4500 sq ft. of empty space.
"Starfield is a fantastic RPG, but not if you play it the way Bethesda wants you to, you'll probably get bored and frustrated before the good stuff comes." This is a direct quote from your last paragraph. I've been playing Bethesda games since Morrowind, and I am so utterly let down by the trajectory the company has been taking since Fallout 4, which to me was when the mediocrity started, but at least for the last few releases, you could play the RPG *your* way; *you* could fill the *role* you wanted to in *their* RPG. Now we have to play a very specific way and follow a very set path in order to experience the good 40 to 50 hours in? A typical work week is 40 hours; that's 8 hours a day for 5 days. Typically, gaming enthusiasts or hobbyists might invest 2 to 3 hours of gaming in a day *if they have no other obligations*. Otherwise, they're lucky to get 8 hours a week. 5 to 6 weeks of playing a game that isn't fun until you've invested that time is a big... BIG ask, especially in a year of utter bangers of games being released from other studios. I sincerely believe Bethesda failed massively with this game, not just in how it was marketed, but how it was designed.
P.S. I hope none of this came off as crass or offensive. A lot of people that have been defending Starfield have been really defensive of it in the past. I'm simply replying with the thoughts I had the second I read the points you put forward. I sincerely hope you have fun getting lost in the game if you're loving it
In some ways I think sony goes too far with accessability but those colour schemes in both spiderman 2 and god of war is such a god send not having to search for the things I'm trying to find.
Good point about the first hour: my only other mate playing it gave up during that hour. Also with only 10 hours under your belt you've probably not gone to the 'Temples' to get the powers yet: the worst mini-game ever and it's the same each time (20+). I stopped bothering after 6-7 as only one of those powers was even decent anyway - and only to help me crossing the endless wastes that are the planets. I only found about 3 decent locations in my time (probably 60+ hours).
It was foreshadowing when they had a boring machine in the tutorial.
A vast, shallow, glitchy world full of boring busywork and robotic NPCs? Sounds like typical Bethesda to me.
I studied English Studies at BSc level, first lesson on writing fiction - you have two sentences maximum to hook the reader. If they're not into it at this point, they won't read the hundred or so pages of story. So, when you tried Starfield and were already bored within the first half hour - that means they failed at the story narrative basic rule I gave above.
I lived in Skyrim, so Starfield hurts me on the level of being a fan of their work and this is their.. 'magnum opus'? Even more worrying, Todd said Starfield was the game he always wanted to make; the same thing he said recently of Indiana Jones so my hopes for that title are at an all-time low too
The game has its up and down moments but I’m still having fun and I finished the game twice with a second character. When traveling there are ways to bypass about half of the loading screens that people complain about and they barely last more than 3-5 seconds anyway so I don’t find them too annoying. Unfortunately a lot of gameplay mechanics and QOL improvements are hidden behind perks which is why the early game is kinda boring
Lastly, I think it’s disingenuous to imply that many if not most reviews of this game are curated by Bethesda considering all of the points you mentioned except the limited accessibility options have been criticized to death by the majority of Starfield reviews out there
It doesn't feel like a game, it feels like the simulated life of a space courier who suffers from narcolepsy every time he goes to travel anywhere
@samuelfoster8615 same, it's like I'm doing a job, especially with games that are live services, I feel like I'm clocking in to do repetitive tasks for no wage, it's like working in a warehouse except instead of a wage you get piles from sitting there for too long
I had a good time with Starfield for as long as I avoided what was supposed to be its main selling point: exploration. As soon as I took break from the quests to learn the game's outpost building and planet surveying mechanics, it became so boring that I just stopped playing entirely. I still plan on going back to finish the main story, but I really don't see much else to do in that huge barren universe. I just refuse to be the classic "soldier guy" that all Bethesda games seem to want us to play as, so my space scoundrel quickly ran out of interesting scoundrel-style quests to do (I did the Crimson Fleet undercover quests btw).
Its main point is the rpg second exploration
Too bad Bethesda doesn't understand what "role-playing" actually means, and so you cannot authentically join factions like the Crimson Fleet, and don't have companions from them.
No, Todd, you can't "go anywhere and do anything" in Starfield. It actively prevents you from doing so, and forces you to do only what it has been scripted to allow. And this game even has to highest rate of "essential" NPCs, it's ludicrous.
To prepare myself for Starfield I played Skyrim for 3 months. I was having a blast with skyrim. Finding new stuff and experience each time I played. Then Starfield came out, I felt deceived. Gameplay and product was aweful. Bugs, poor game mechanics, nothing engaging. I tried to play more since everybody said it is gonna be better. I played maybe 15 hours more then uninstalled the game. I couldnt take it anymore. It is just a bad game no matter how you try to sugarcoat it!
you can limit menu interaction in some cases when traveling to planets. If you pull up the scanner when in your ship you can get a hold button prompt to travel to an adjacent system or the mission system (if you have enough range). This brings you to the grav jump cutscene without menu interaction. You can also use the scanner when in orbit and do the same thing for landing sites, with a caveat. If the landing site has multiple locations you can fast travel to (e.g. New Atlantis), hovering your reticle over the landing zone with scanner open doesnt allow you to hold a button to land there. It prompts you to open the map. This doesnt make sense to me as the landing sites can be individually seen with the scanner. I should be able to point my ship at any one of them and do the same thing as if its a single landing site.
Starfield is fun either after playing for 20 hours, or before you spend money on it. I'm doing the latter and having a great time.
A video game developer must always be asking themselves... Is this fun? when in development
Definitely a stopgap for me. After a month I haven't even gone past the first few missions of the game. Pretty much just leveling characters and seeing which guns I like. Probably won't finish the main quest either
Subscribed sir, thanks for one of the most honest reviews I have heard in years.
Very glad you enjoyed it. Thank you so much for the Sub
You nailed exactly how i felt when trying to play this game. After trying a second time i just thought to myself, this is def not enough and def not worth it. And being an old time gamer i could see thru its thin shell quite fast thankfully and could get a refund once more...Sad rly since was looking forward to this game for a long time before release and wasnt that hyped up as i was thinking; if its just as entertaining as Fallout 4 (which felt pretty short for me) i could be contempt, but not even that
What i hated was the space mechanics. After playing no mans sky. It felt like walmart no mans sky
There is something that I don't see in many of the reviewer narratives I've listened to, and that is the sheer amount of criticism every Bethesda title has gotten ever since Morrowind. There's always been a lot of people complaining that the worlds aren't big enough, or that this or that questline got missed because the player got distracted by some random cave or dungeon, or that once you complete the questlines, there's nothing to do but repetitive loops that don't really feel rewarding. Whatever elements have existed in their games, they have each gotten vocally criticized.
Then the modding tools get released, and suddenly every aspect that had been criticized gets multiple diverse overhauls giving the players more options than any developer could ever provide.
I think that Bethesda has learned from these past experiences and decided that Starfield was going to provide a massive amount of places to go, some solid core stories to experience, and basic mechanics that are augmented and given new abilities through skills and perks... The true longevity of their previous titles (Morrowind is over 20 years old and is still played and modded today) never began until the modding tools were released. Bethesda is on record as recognizing that fact, and has expressed the intent to embrace it. The want to see Starfield lasting a decade, and already have pledged intent to support it with additional material for five years.. The previous titles got a couple of expansions, but aside from that, as far as BGS was concerned, they were done. But Skyrim alone showed them that a single-player game could remain commercially viable for a decade. Content creators not only showcasing the game itself, but playing through mods, and showing off player houses/castles/etc., sparking interest in many who for whatever reason had not gotten into the game when it launched. So it is clear to me that Bethesda plans to fully embrace this outcome, and so Starfield as it is now, is merely a foundation for everything it will become over time. They'll re-release it several times over the years, with updated performance and visuals, and bundling all previous DLC releases so newcomers will have everything they need in terms of official content right out of the box. It has been the community (modders and players) that has kept all of BGS's RPGs alive far beyond their "shelf life". Not Bethesda.
Just like all the other BGS RPGs, we're not going to know what Starfield is going to end up being until many years down the road. and whatever that is then, compared to what it is now, will be an entirely different animal. And I predict that when we reach the five year mark, Bethesda will have curated a list of modders as candidates for a dream team, a sub-studio of BGS that will exist to carry on OFFICIAL content releases for the next five years and beyond. So when Elder Scrolls 6 launches, Starfield will still be receiving official material, made by people who will have built a solid reputation as moders from the community operating at top-tier quality. Todd has said that he wants to see modding become a career path. It's not a career if the modder in question can only ever hope to receive a tiny percentage of revenue, like what happens with the previous creation club paid mods. For it to be a career, they need to get paid a real salary doing real work in an official capacity. But only the top-tier mod producers should have a shot at getting invited to join that team.
Just to be clear, top-tier need not mean just people who produce epic-scale mods. Their work could consist of a whole bunch of little mods that add something meaningful to the overall game, designed with careful attention to functionality so there are very few, if any, conflicts with other mods. Or they could be stand-alone missions that mesh well with the lore and themes they are tied to.
What flags a modder as a potential candidate would be based on practical metrics. Not player votes, but player engagement being one of the metrics. How many players view the modder's project pages. How many players actually download the projects. How many of them actively use them in gameplay. If people don't like a mod, they simply turn it off and don't use it. With Microsoft's resources behind them now, even older BGS games could find new life officially breathed into them in this way. Not just Starfield. Now there would still be some creative control over the dream team by Bethesda. For example, all dream team projects would need to be approved by BGS, to ensure that nothing goes out of bounds in terms of lore. But BGS would probably do well to just lay out a list of "Don't do this" rules, with the idea that pretty much anything else is fair game.
If Starfield goes the direction I think it has the potential to go, In a few years, the negative reviews, for the most part, will be rendered moot. It can go all sorts of different ways, though. But no matter what way it goes, what Starfield is now is not all it will ever be.
The loading screens dont bother me as much as ive seen seen it bothers some people, dont get me wrong a black screen is pretty boring. But to have an animation play so it feels like were actively traveling to that location i feel would work wonders.
100 plus hours in after 7 hoursy opinion hasnt changed I whole heartedly agree with this video..another fallout 76
Epic review. Subbed.
Wait...
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait...
Y is the jump button? Y?!?!
This is the first I've heard that one, and I am genuinely astonished by that... and most definitely _not_ in a good way.
The fact that it took them so long to deliver a game that was _by design_ archaic and boring (even by the studio's standards) should revoke anyone's hope for Elder Scrolls VI or Fallout 5.
Bethesda's writing, lack of quality, and inability to take feedback has only been getting worse with each game.
I enjoyed my time with the game but couldn't recommend it to most other people. I stuck with it until I'd completed the main quest and most of the factions but lost interest soon after.
However, I was left with a sense of what might have been. There was potential here. The game is a strange mishmash of solid technical updates in places from Bethesda's previous RPGs combined with design decisions that haven't been rethought since 2006's Oblivion. It feels so dated in places.
I hope the muted/mixed community response is a wake-up call for Bethesda before the next Elder Scrolls or Fallout.
I've actually put in 200hrs (unfortunately a great deal of that is boring fetch and carry resource finding/working and building), I have finished the game and started NG+ but there's nothing, it's a classic mile wide inch deep game but even worse that so much of it is copy & paste locations.
Great review., echos my experience, loved the Simpsons meh 😂 3 loading screens to get anywhere is insanity... I stopped playing around 20hrs... Couldn't do it anymore
There is a massive conflict of expectations vs patience that is tearing gaming development apart.
I am happy to wait for Star Citizen, because i know the whole premise is to make something difficult, and that takes time. And the recent announcements and show cases are amazing.
But its also perfectly fine to have smaller projects.
Starfield is lost somewhere in between, promised big but delivered small. I can tell you a way better SciFI narrative in one single star system, even with all the loading screens. It is a conceptual failure, and it feels very much that they did not have the balls to just make a game they wanted to make but tried to appeal to everyone and in doing so failed to make anything outstanding.
I used to follow ACG till his review of Starfield.
They don’t even send the B team hell not even the C team to the basketball ball World Cup. They send who they can.
I think the accessibility comparison is good but maybe you got the wrong point from it (obvs ignoring accessibility is not a good look at all). The lack of options show how little care was put into the development and polish of the game. They could barely finish the actual foundations how would they have time for any accessibility stuff.
This game is the definition of mid, I dont care what anyone says, the temple power sections are literally proof of it, i cannot believe that crap made it to the final release.
I really tried to like this game for the 100 bucks and 99 hours I put in. It will grow on me, it will grow.. And then it suddenly dawned on me.
Oh crap CP 2077 2.0 patch is out tomorrow, and Phantom liberty a week after!
Haven't played Starefield since. Probably will stay that way.
Excellent review! It's a shame that Bethesda exists in a bubble like they do. Todd(ler) Howard is probably not even aware of the rest of the gaming industry. He probably believes he is the industry, with their "cutting edge technology" (LOL). So...they'll never see this excellent review and they will never learn anything from it.
Thank you so much
Starfailed is a game I would expect from an indie studio of like 50 people making a passion project
Not a supposedly triple A studio with enough money to hire all the people they need for their game.
Yeah, your right pal. It's about keeping you in that game for as long as possible. Who's betting that it gets the most played game for 2023-24. I'm a NMS player and it seems in last year or so that it's been intentionally subdued, to make way for this. It's good to see an honest review 👍.
man, what
The game is maybe a 5 out of 10 it needs better exploration, better AI, to me at least a better story than you touch a item get a vision get given a ship from a guy who had a similar vision, I don’t understand how you are needed if he has a similar vision.
Starfield : Release Date 2023
Gamebryo Engine: 2011
Why did you want to walk (or run i guess) so quickly in the opening scene?
I guess you're using mouse & keyboard & maybe that doesn't give the option to choose the exact speed you move at?
I'm on pc with an xbox controller & i soaked up every second of that opening scene. Admittedly it was a new interface as i only just switched from Playstation to pc for this game, but anyway, i'm the sort of player who's in no hurry & i think that's a good approach to get more out of this type of game.
Actually played on Xcloud with an Xbox official Android controller.
I don't want to run away from the NPC, I want to hear what they have to say, but when my characters walk is 4 times the speed of the NPC, it makes that walk and talk unessicerily difficult. It's bad design and it's the first thing you can interact with
@@Doragon86 so it's an xbox controller with two analog sticks, one for movement & one for aiming?
You can move as slow or as fast as you like by varying how much you push the stick, can't you?
I can imagine this being a problem for mouse & keyboard players though.
I think he was running. I switched to Walk when following an NPC and walked almost the exact same speed as the NPC. I never experienced what he did. And I enjoyed focusing on the dialog in the first 45 minutes. A lot of lore and story there. You learn about 4 Factions. You learn why Lin is so upset with Barrett and Barrett incorrectly saying Bindi was actually kind of fun later in the game. A different feel than Skyrim but still enjoyable to loot everything not nailed down.
And THIS started just a year after Star Citizen with a established studio/team? Okay it is another genre (no Sim) but a little better space flight I would have expected...
Starfield is like it is to get it running on series s!!
Good review. Glad this does not effect my choice. I got the game, and enjoy it. What reviewers, and content creators eat, don't make me run to the bathroom. I enjoyed why i payed for, and i hope others do as well. The World we live in atm is a big Negative, but we live and enjoy our lives in it.
The conversations are fine. They keep you emerged, hust like Baldurs Gate 3 for example.
bethesda thinks making it about space gives it the "open world" feel but ironically feels more linear than their previous titles.
Just caught this review, I have about 115 hours into it. So I like more of it than I dislike ultimately or else I wouldn't put that much time into it. However I can't claim that 115 hours of this game was enjoyable. I think if I were to be honest it's really only 60 to 70% of that that was enjoyable. Again it's enough for me to say that I personally think the game is good, but it's not great and way too many people have been ignoring the flaws. If you're in a star field group on Facebook for example if you dare criticize this game at all you're just labeled a hater. But I don't understand that. I've been a fan of Bethesda RPGs ever since Oblivion, heck I even played Morrowind for a bit before that I just couldn't quite get into it. So as such there are still things this game has that no other game really captures the way that Bethesda does. But the issue I've had from Fallout 4 up until now is that they're not innovating on the basics.
Graphics, animation, general gameplay, technical polish, none of this is really improving. Sometimes things even go backwards with the way that the games present themselves as RPGs. part of why I ultimately like this game better than Fallout 4 is just because it has a proper dialogue system again, but that shouldn't be something that I have to compare in the first place. I feel like Fallout 4 felt kind of dated and disappointing to me because it released right after the Witcher 3 which I think upstaged it as an RPG, upstaged it with general storytelling, and arguably upstaged it as an open world.
This time around we have Starfield releasing right after baldur's gate 3 and it feels even more dated this time. When you're in space or you're on some desolate moon and you can see the stars and the adjacent planet above you in the sky, the game looks gorgeous. Other times this game looks and feels 10 years old. The way NPCs animate, the way they still awkwardly shuffle around to try and face you when you're talking, or the ones that just glitch and never actually even face you when they're talking. This engine just feels so dated and it makes me worry for Elder Scrolls 6
I learned to deal with the fact that for a game centered around a group of space explorers, that actual space exploration sucks. Once I toss aside the main story and started doing some factions and side quests was when I really started having fun. But again I had to kind of get in the mindset that I am not going to set out and explore this galaxy rather I am going to pick up a lot of quests that lead me across the galaxy on their own little stories. It got more tolerable that way because nothing was really overstaying its welcome, I was going to new places with a clear objective in mind and once I completed that objective I left. The one time I tried to take a mission for surveying a planet it was the most tedious and boring 2 hours of the game that I ever spent, and I didn't even finish it.
But I have found some genuinely enjoyable quests, there are still multiple ways to often solve the problems in these quests, and sometimes the combat can be pretty fun, it's great when you are in 0 G environments.
But I even have drawbacks to that, a lot of enemies in this game are annoying as hell to fight, the robots that just straight up rush you, all manner of tiny little insect aliens, barely noticeable turrets. A lot of times when I am doing quests that involve lots of these enemies I find myself going into my imagination and pretending that what I'm doing is cooler than what it actually looks like. Something like the Crimson fleet quest line was awesome but that first mission they take you on in the prison which has a great concept behind it, just has a lot of tiny little annoying bugs to shoot.
I'm not regretting playing this game, I will come back to it when there is official mod support and when they release DLC, I do however regret paying the extra 30 bucks to play it early over Labor Day weekend. I thought this would be a great vacation to sit and play a long game like this, and instead for like the first 10 hours I kept thinking I wasted my money and was going to totally hate the game. I'm glad that I don't, but I wish I would have just waited
The base game is 85$ in Poland (EU) where I live.
Due to exchange rates and regional pricing shenanigans...
So "muh" does not cut it when I have to cough up 85$.
For me, it IS "do not buy". Not now. Not for the full price.
Starfield Was the Best-selling game of September 2023 in the U.S
Starfield is to a "good game" as a canker sore is to a "good time."
My first watch of one of your videos. Is your modus operandi to berate. That's just the feel I got straight from the intro.
Mods will not be able to fix this fundamentally flawed game.
it makes me sad but Bethesda just isnt putting effort into gameplay and experience. They need to try much harder or move over for better developers.
Oh, forgot. You mentioned Forza as a good example. The latest Forza Motorsport is getting horrific reviews.
Aa one person said: "How can this game get better over time if I already made refund?"
Todd Howard: "16 times the menus!"
Or was it "16 times the loading screens!"
Probably both!!
I'm saving Baldurs Gate 3 to to be my 'hibernation game' to play over Christmas (bah Humbug etc). I picked up Starfield to tide me over till then, but after 3 weeks I was just so bored of it I can't bring myself to play it anymore. Meh, naybe I'll reinstall cyberpunk. I hear that's less shit now
After playing BG3 it becomes even more clear how shallow Starfield is... BG is just... Endless... Developers created so much in it that its scary to think about it. If Behestada cared half as much about their Starfield as BG developers did... We would have had exceptional space game...
i had ablast with cyberpunnk on ps5. Phantom liberty dlc was great aswell. There was a starfield designer playing it on youtube, you should have seen how happy he was, lol.
The game was at its best when it was slow af and mature and educational. Taking tours of methane processing stacks was sick
was it really tho?
i just reversed all the gb of this game into a fallout4 modded experience and i have no regrets, it's more fun.
…your time in the Light is brief.
use it well
I think this is the first bethesda game that i will probably never go back to
If you want a nice easy relaxing exploration game, No Mans Sky runs circles around Starfield lol
The further we move from the launch date of Starfield, the more I see reviews like this. The game was nowhere NEAR what Bethesda/MS told us we were getting. It was ok, but not fantastic. THEY (Bethesda/MS) NEEDED this to be a 90+ reviewed game. It is maybe a 70.....
It looks like you missed the gun on the landing pad...
Also, the trader you meet,if you tell him you didn't see visions, he ignores you and keeps talking about the visions YOU had
5 years of hope,, and we get This
I was thinking about picking this up after my 3rd playthrough of BG3, but so far nothing i'm seeing on CZcams is making me think that's a good idea... I think I only found 1 reviewer so far who thought this game was the bee's knees
don't get it. i wasted 160 hrs. Wait for some dlc to come or for mods to fininsh the game.
Played for about 90 hours and have given up. Waiting for mods to fix stuff like the spaceship travelling. What really disappoints me is the side quests, they are so dull.
Im playing it. Im enjoying it. But i think thats because it is on game pass and it has cost me nothing. And im just waiting till i can get a new pc to play BG3