Memes

45132 readers

3258 users here now

Rules:

Be civil and nice.
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

[email protected]

Another Starfield Post (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

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

I somehow entirely missed the hype around this game and came across it again only accidentally on early release day when looking at some other sale on Steam. Been playing it and it seems fine to me in a vague Skyrim-in-space sort of way, which is all what I was expecting from a Bethesda RPG.

The world seems alive enough and there are plenty of side-quests and amusing / interesting things to discover. Now suddenly I have been coming across a bunch of posts everywhere where the game is supposed to be terrible or something. Still seems fine to me, but maybe I have lower standards after decades of gaming. shrug.

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

i've seen a couple of people play the start, it looked fun

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

question is how many of yers have paid for it huh

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

I’ve put about 200 hours into Oblivion and 180 into Skyrim, 150 each into Fallout 3 and Fallout 4, all without mods. Been happy every time. I think the whiners need their attention spans checked. Go watch Paw Patrol if you need constant action, you big babies.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why are people pretending the game isn't getting glowing reviews? Is the Bethesda hate circlejerk still going on?

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

I like the game, but reviews are pretty unreliable these days. Cyberpunk 2077 also got a load of 8/9/10s on release and that game ran like shit and was full of bugs.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Stop complaining. Play it if you want, don't if you don't want to. People just like to be popular and liked. Everyone bandwagoned on Baldurs Gate being good but I can't think of a type of game I hate more than that. Now everyone is bandwagoning on this because A- they don't have an Xbox or a PC, or B- they want to be cool and alternative.

I mean come on, last week everyone was saying "omg Baldurs Gate has no microtransactions! Roleplaying! GOTY!" And now with Xbox/Bethesda making a game just like that, you guys instantly roast it for being......a Bethesda game.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Well if you want to get nitpicky there's no "roleplaying" in a Bethesda games because there are no bad outcomes. Minor spoilers about BG3.

For instance in BG3 I went into a camp swords blazing and murdered everything in sight. Turns out I killed a recruitable companion along the way that I never would've found out if I hadn't read about it online. Technically speaking that's an undesirable outcome because I'm going to miss out on some content but at that moment I didn't give a fuck and similarly the game just went along with it. At no point did the game even hint that maybe I shouldn't kill that character, if anything the game told me the objective is to kill that character. Had it been a Bethesda game I 100% would've been prevented from just murdering that companion and the game had given me a chance to recruit them.

Similarly I reloaded one hard fight 4 times to save a character who was relatively important to the story. That bitch just kept on running into AOE effects and getting herself killed. BG3 didn't give a fuck if that character lived or died because the story would've continued without her. We all know how Bethesda handles characters that are important to the story, they literally cannot die.

And finally I'm currently at a point where the game gave me 2 choices, either I send one of my companions into eternal servitude or another character important to the story dies. Maybe there's a third option that lets me save both but I might've missed it. If this was a Bethesda game there wouldn't even be such a situation because it doesn't matter what you choose, either option has a bad outcome.

And those are just examples from my current playthrough. From what I've seen others play you might not even get to those decisions, which means some decisions will lock out other decisions down the line and that's once again something Bethesda does less and less with each game

Baldurs gate 3 gets praise because it's a great game, Starfield gets shit because underneath it's just Skyrim in space. Are we supposed to give praise for a game that follows a decade old design philosophy? If Doom 93 came out today should we lose our collective minds? No, because the industry has moved forward. Our expectations should be higher than Skyrim. There are good things about Starfield. The moment to moment combat seems excellent and Bethesda clearly has improved the visuals compared to FO4 and FO76. But the rest of the game seems it could've just as well been released back in 2011.

And before you think I'm some hyped up tweeb who is now disappointed that Starfield didn't live up to the hype, I haven't been hyped about a Bethesda game since Fallout 3. I'm well aware how easily Bethesda springs up hype and how the final product doesn't really match the hype they promote. I had pretty basic expectations of what Starfield might be and I feel like Starfield was pretty much in the ballpark to the expectations I had: good shooting, lots and lots of loading screens and menus and very little of actual "space". That's to say I didn't have high expectations in the first place.

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

All that gameplay you described? Is ancient. The industry has moved on as you say. You clicked through menus and virtually rolled dice to do that. That's so old, it predates video games themselves.

At least Starfield is more modern than turn based gameplay.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I've been wondering about BG3. It seems like the main game mechanics are horrible, but perhaps the story is good. So it sounds to me like a fantasy Disco Elysium.

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

My GF played it a lot and I saw so many bugs, quests breaking, and crazy difficulty spikes. But when Bethesda has some bugs? Oh my gosh, people start rioting. People just love to hate when they get the chance.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah it's weird, I've seen a few really annoying bugs in bg3 and a fair bit of plot confusion and quest muddling - if Todd had made it people would be screaming about that and ignoring all the great parts.

Half my inventory is full of random things I don't know if I need, most from weird side quests that were never really explained or resolved in any meaningful way and I've forgotten about. The writing isn't bad but it's often confusing, I often find myself having to pick at random because I haven't memorized enough weird names and background lore to know what I'm actually saying.

The leveling and combat system is top notch though so props to them for inventing that.

And I'm certainly not saying it's not great, it's a great game and a lot of fun but if it had been the target of a anti circlejerk rather than a pro one we'd be seeing a totally different side to it.

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

Exactly. It always seemed to me like the game was held together by tape and toothpicks. If Bethesda, EA, Ubisoft or some other bigger company had made the game, people would give it a 6-7/10 and would complain up and down about the mechanics.