this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
1330 points (91.7% liked)

Memes

45679 readers
1112 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 215 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (85 children)

I don't get it.

People wanted another Bethesda game.

They got what they wanted.

I said in 2008, after playing the first Fallout game by Bethesda instead of Black Isle: "Only Bethesda could manage to make a post apocalyptic prostitute boring."

They've always been boring, they've always had ugly character models, and the writing has always been bad. You get what you paid for. A Bethesda game.

[–] [email protected] 76 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

I think the fundamental problem is that people had different expectations for a game set in space, both because Bethesda stoked them (all of that talk of having the idea decades ago / first new franchise in however many years / Microsoft bought the company just to get it as an exclusive / etc) and because after No Man's Sky people kind of expected that with their budget / resources they would manage to fix that game's problems and create something richer + more seamless.

In retrospect, if they'd simply sold it as "Skyrim in Space," admitted to the limitations up front - same underlying engine, limited amount of variety to procedurally-generated content, loading screens instead of seamless takeoff/landing, etc - and not pretended that it was something new, the response would have probably been much more uniformly positive.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 year ago (2 children)

But they kind of already did say most of that stuff.

They said long before the game came out that there was no seamless takeoff/landing. They said they upgraded their Creation Engine for Starfield, AFAIK they never said it was entirely new.

Either way, I like it. Its fun.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Either way, I like it. Its fun.

And that's great! I think we're mostly talking about the people who are whinging about it. People who are enjoying it, let em enjoy it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Hmm, I missed that about seamless takeoff/landing. But as @dingus mentions, you can use cutscenes and animations and other things to make that feel more immersive / continuous even if they are temporarily dropping you out of the engine.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The setting lowered my expectations. Modern sci-fi has this weird obsession with being sterile and boring. Compared to the magical fantasy of Elder Scrolls and the zany retro-futurism of Fallout, it was guaranteed to be boring.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think you're on the right track, but I think it's also because recent games did better with similar ideas. People shat all over Mass Effect Andromeda, but it hid loading screens behind interplanetary and FTL travel that was actually visualized. In my brain, I know they're cutscenes to cover for loading data, but it's enough to take you out of it being a "game" and allowing you to suspend your disbelief. It's hard to suspend disbelief when there's a loading screen constantly in front of you.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, but you can do the same thing in Star Field, just takes a bit of learning. You get the exact same cut scenes for loading even, ala Mass Effect. The reality is the game offers fast travel, as essentially jumping 5 times and loading and seeing the cut scenes is the same thing as just loading to the end.

This game feels more like a test, do you actually want to explore, or do you want to hop point to point for the quest. You can do either. It just seems to offer fast travel as the first option, but you can take the slow way around too

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

after No Man's Sky people kind of expected that with their budget / resources they would manage to fix that game's problems and create something richer + more seamless

That was basically what I hoped for. NMS type game, but with Skyrim/ fallout level modding, stories, quests and deeper meaning to it.

And with better procgen. They have the manpower and expertise to do that.

I haven't bought the game yet, waiting to see the initial responses. Now.. I'll probably pick it up on sale sometime, when bugs are fixed and there's solid mods.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly I still think waiting to buy a Bethesda game is smart if you aren't a huge fan or something. Skyrim was pretty crap at launch and all the praise it gets now is mostly referring to Skyrim well after launch when patches and mods turned it into something good.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I played Skyrim at launch and it was great.

Mods added another level to the game but I can happily play the game without.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

I mean, it is extremely polished. I have encountered a total of 2 bugs over my entire playtime. By this time in fallout 4 I lost track of the number of bugs I saw, things jittering atound, people's faces acting wonky, nome of that here.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Closest I can get you is "Spacerimming: An Anal Odyssey", will that do?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

No but I'll hold on to that for now thanks

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Skyrim mods to the rescue?

load more comments (78 replies)