You bought a Bethesda game before a community patch was available.
They knew what they were doing.
So a normal Bethesda launch. Has no one told these “gamers” what they were buying?
I feel like Bethesda had their moment in the sun with Skyrim and Fallout 3, but since those days they really haven’t made a big RPG that’s felt good.
And as I enter hour 120+ in Kingdom Come Deliverance 2, still happily playing DLC and side quests, I can’t imagine wanting to go back to play a Bethesda RPG. They’ve been lapped, in my opinion, at this point.
They’re still in an Xbox 360 mindset, in a world where Baldur’s Gate 3 and KCD2 exist.
Action gamers are spoiled for choice. RPG gamers are spoiled for choice. I just don’t see where Bethesda’s “here’s a wonky game engine and a big map” approach fits in that.
Even the “big map” thing is done better by other companies at this point.
There’s basically one loading screen in KCD2 (besides pure fast travel) and it’s between the two giant maps in the game. Otherwise, you can walk Henry’s silly ass from one end of the map to the other and go into any number of buildings and never see a loading screen.
And most games do this type of asset streaming now, so when Bethesda rolls up with a “open world” RPG with loading screens all over the place it’s like “what is this?”
The game was trash on the PC, and they thought that downgrading it to a console was going to make it playable?
I recently tried playing it again, and I wouldn’t say it’s “trash”. Yes, they completely dropped the ball on the exploration part of their exploration game, but the meat and bones of a Bethesda RPG are still in there. It’s a good time for anyone bored of replaying Skyrim and/or Fallout if you get it on sale.
Also it runs perfectly on Linux
This. Bethesda cheaped out on environmental storytelling and fleshed out characters (which is unfortunate since that’s their thing). But the systems they’ve built up in Creation Engine have gotten really good
They won’t patch it until they can release a “Next Gen Upgrade”
No surprise there, Bethesda didn’t fix shit for any of the re-re-re-re-releases of Skyrim, why would anyone think they’d do that for Starfield?
didn’t fix shit for any of the re-re-re-re-releases of Skyrim
Skyrim Special Edition was built for x64 architecture (the original was on x32), is significantly more stable, and supports 4096+254 plugin files (vs 255 in the original). The modding scene has only gotten better frome the update. And let’s not forget the VR support.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. They didn’t change any of the gameplay because 1: the base game is still fun to play and 2: people already mod the hell out of it to fit what they want
USSEP is still around the last time I checked.
Porting a buggy game on a technically satisfactory level does not excuse porting the games with the bugs included.
UESP has existed since like 6 months after the original release of Skyrim and addresses hundreds if not thousands of bugs from minor to quest breaking.
Why go through the effort of a remaster if you can’t address basic gameplay bugs?
Maybe they need to upgrade their PS5
I liked Starfield (I even 100%ed the achievements on Steam). I also loved No Man’s Sky long before the shift in pubic sentiment towards it, so maybe I’m just weird. But if you’re reading this and thinking “this guy wouldn’t know a good game if it shat a voxel-based turd onto his chest”, you’re WRONG. I also loved MindsEye. So there.
Omg me too! Wasn’t there a marketing term for person that tends to buy only failed products and based on them liking a product they could predict whether it would fail or not? Always thought I’m one of those. Mafia 3 - loved it, but hated mafia 2. Love AC 1,3 and syndicate but didn’t vibe with 2 or black flag. Loved Borderlands 1, hated all the sequels etc. Still, I feel the hate against starfield is way overblown and there’s too much polarization. A game can be either great or awful, with no more room for meh games.
A game can be either great or awful, with no more room for meh games.
I think it’s more just that expectations are much higher for a AAA studio like Bethesda. They built so much hype and asked for nearly $100 at launch for a game that didn’t live up. There’s plenty of meh games out there, they’re just priced accordingly. There’s also a ton of really great games out there priced way lower than what AAA studios are asking. I think it’s very fair to hold those studios to a standard that reflects the prices they’re charging.
“Harbinger of failure” is the term you’re looking for. Not sure it applies here, though; I think most of these games were commercially successful.
And because I can’t resist sticking my own opinion everywhere, I personally thought Starfield had a ton of potential and squandered it with some highly questionable design choices and poor execution. Some of that may be fixed now, but some of it is baked in. There’s genuinely a lot to like, but as a whole I thought it was really dragged down by some of those bad decisions.
I also liked AC1, though, and was a little disappointed with 2. The first one was imperfect but bold and new and interesting. The second got rid of most of what made the first one unique in an effort to appeal to broader audiences. I still liked it, but it wasn’t special.
Yeah, no amount of mods will fix some of Starfield’s faults, but it foes have some of that old bethesda coziness, so it’s not all bad.
Starfield’s main issue is that it isn’t fleshed out as much as the other Bethesda games. And there’s a lot of mods to do that for Elder Scrolls and Fallout. The issue is that it didn’t capture enough attention to get as much TLC from the mod community
Kinda tough sell to release a $70 game, then leave it up to the modding community to finish it for you
What year is it? Didn’t we already do this?
Why would someone buy Starfield?
I got it for free with my cpu
Some people enjoy bad games and that’s okay.
I pirated it and wish I could get my seed time back.
I also pirated it and spent most if not all my time building ships. naturally had to use console codes to bypass the restrictions but that’s all I did.
the game itself? boring. the characters? bunch of god damn nerds. Like seriously your party are some of the most whiny unlikable characters in gaming. I didn’t care for any of them. AND THEN if you decide “oh I want to be a pirate and do bad things” they just whine even more about it.
I have a feeling Bethesda’s executives ordered the development team to make it as un-controversial as possible. “I don’t give a damn if the game is terrible. You will lose your jobs if you compromise this merger.”
The wear on my mouse from clicking on the torrent already wasn’t worth it.
I fucking bought it, imagine my despair
Why?
I played it a tad too much to be refunded
I know this doesn’t help you, but someone might find it useful: Steam’s two-hour refund limit only applies to automatic, unconditional refunds. If a refund is justified (e.g. the game is a broken disaster, or the publisher lied about its nature), it may be granted beyond the two-hour window, like it was after Activision lied about AI usage in Black Ops 7.
Thanks, always good to know.
In the case of Starfield, the game ran fine for me, it was just shitty, so not sure this applies…
My condolences.
Thank you, that’s very kind
I’ve had a lot of fun with it on Xbox since launch
Because influencers tell them to? It’s not like Xbox players haven’t been taking about the bugs and other issues for the last few years.
But really though. The gun play is fun ads hell, just like any Bethesda game. And, it’s true, you can build a ship, take off, walk around in it… there’s a certain appeal to that. The guts are there to make a decent game. They just don’t love it quite as much as the least of the four fans who still play it.
The gun play is fun ads hell, just like any Bethesda game
You must not have played Fallout 3 or New Vegas. The gunplay was pretty bad before Fallout 4, to the point where you were better off using V.A.T.S. most of the time.
That being said, the gunplay since Fallout 4 has been pretty good. Especially the auto-lean around corners when you use ADS
Bethesda games notoriously have shitty gun play.
Eh, Starfield feels the same as any other regular modern shooter, so like COD. It doesn’t feel like Doom, of course, but that’s it’s own thing.
How so? They’re fun, and the guns, while silly, are fun to shoot.
Do you mean they’re historically inaccurate?
Or do we just have incompatible views of fun (i.e. it’s subjective)?
The only Bethesda game I can think of with shitty gun play is Skyrim, because then we’re talking about archery. And then, it’s shitty because the way arrows work is, they are spawned at the player’s feet, elevated to the bow, and then fired relatively accurately in an arc. The problem is, the ground is not completely flat, which is why if you’re firing uphill, or there’s a ridge at your feet, you fire into the ground despite very obviously clearing it.
And the only problem I have with guns in Bethesda games applies to just about any game with machine guns: bullets become far less deadly when you can shoot a lot of them in a short amount of time than when you can only fire one at a time. This is categorically false: every bullet from a machine gun is just as deadly as that same bullet would have been, had it been fired from a single-shot weapon. They just make machine guns do less damage per hit to balance the gun, so it’s not overly powerful, and that is stupid. Sometimes they at least make these guns cheaper to shoot, so they’re balanced to cost as well as damage, but in a world where the minimum cost of one bullet (or arrow) is one {CURRENCY} (bottle cap, Septim, whatever), they aren’t nearly cheap enough to justify the damage reduction.
But, maybe next time instead of saying “no you’re wrong,” give us some context. It’s fine to have a differing opinion if you can back it up with some examples.
Bethesda still hasn’t provided the fun of knocking someone on their ass with a point blank shotgun blast. Manhunt did that 20 years ago.
This is one of the most common criticisms of the Bethesda Fallout games, so I didn’t think I had to qualify my opinion. I am far from the first person to make this claim. Even Bethesda realized the gunplay was lacking in their Fallout games, which is why they hired people from Doom to work on Starfield.
The guns have little feeling of impact or weight, they lack good animations, and there is little variety in the types of recoil or spread. Most of the time you just end up spraying at the enemy, and it takes too many rounds. The guns feel more like squirt guns than real guns.
True, but developers from id Software helped Bethesda specifically for Starfield’s gunplay, which is actually fun this time around compared to Fallout 4.
The gun play in Fallout 4 was actually good. It’s 3 and New Vegas where it sucked
Because they only have Playstation consoles and keep their eyes and ears shut to anything not on Playstation, so they haven’t heard how bad of a game it is.
Youre right, its a game people are ‘told’ to buy, rather than a recommendation. The first thing they see when they start up their console will be an ad for it.
Consoles have always had that market of just buying a few big games a year, they never broke into the indie scene very well.
But PC isnt immune to it, Steam shows ads for launches on startup and both platforms suffer from social media influence. The biggest seller of games has to be Twitch. Get a bunch of streamers playing your shitty game and youll sell loads of copies.
Steam shows ads for launches on startup and both platforms suffer from social media influence.
I haven’t seen the startup ads in what seems like a decade. I don’t see a big deal with content creators providing reviews (and commentary), the key is finding content creators who are independent and focus on the needs of their viewers/readers.
There’s no issue with it, they are obviously going to take money to play a game, that’s on their own morals to decide.
But a lot of people just blindly buy whatever is shown to them, its why standards for games in the mainstream market has fallen off a cliff over the last 15 years. We have people buying $30 skins on the regular…
At least you can turn off Steam’s startup ads. I forgot those even were a thing until you mentioned it since I haven’t seen them in years.
I have them disabled too, but even if you just open Steam, there will be an ad on the store page.
A store telling you what it sells?
Oh! The outrage! The audacity!
You missed the context.
Did I? the whole conversation is moot. Why wouldn’t a store show you what it is selling? Yes, launch titles get the spotlight for a while. Should movie theaters remove all the posters because it is disgusting marketing(?). There’s a difference between that and egregious, invasive and unethical advertisement. But it is impossible to expect a point of sale to not advertise what it sells. Even still, Steam allows you to disable startup ads and you can also boot directly to library so you don’t have to see the store page ever unless you want to. It’s so much different from what Play Station and Xbox do.
First Bethesda game?
Not even a proper release on PS5. Glitchy as hell and not complete on disk for physical. Embarrassing.
Genuine question, are literally any PS5 gamed actually physically on the disk fully?
Yes, most.
Lol why downvote I haven’t bought a console since x360 I’m literally just asking
I have about 140 hours in the game on PC, since launch. I haven’t played it since. I was just poking around the mods at Nexus, I see the Genesis thing. That might be worth playing it again.
Mods keep Bethesda games going, I have over 6700 hours in FO4. That’s only because of the mods.
Sadly mods won’t fix the fact you have to play a loading screen.
The fact that Bethesda thought they could get away with their ancient engine once again is laughable.
lol I sent this article to my brother and he sent me like 20 texts defending the game.
Be kind to him, he’s in a abusive relationship with them 😁
LOL imagine creating a game that runs like total ass on a powerful PC and then releasing it on Playstation…
