With less than three weeks left of Starfields release, I thought I'd give my own personal take on what might come of it.
I'm a huge space nerd. Love Space games, and love it in real life. KSP is one of my favorite games. No Mans Sky was what I dreamed of, and then on release...it was a mess. Tried to get into it now, and I WANT to like it. It's clearly had effort put into it. But the core problems are still there. The main one being: Procedural generation.
No Mans Sky feels like a mile wide and an inch deep even now. The planets lack variety. It's pretty much a single biome across the entire system. The outposts look almost the same. Landmarks are the same. Creatures are the same. It makes no sense. Of course, that's due to the procedural generation. And it shows. I could go on about how the story and side quests are uninteresting and frankly, lazy. But that's besides the point. Even if it's a core issue. I would rather have two or three massive, full scale solar systems with a couple of planets that are hand crafted and have a TON of work done to them. With, you know, actual biomes and some dead ones sprinkled in.
Thing is, Bethesda has been experimenting with radial quests and procedural generation for over a decade now. They have shown they care about detail and substance. They know what players look for. They're not gonna implement a half baked system and do what NMS did. Because we all know how that turned out. And to me, it sounds like they clearly believe this system is ready now. After all, while the radial quests in Skyrim were not perfect, (Dark Brotherhood Forever), they were pretty good in moderation. And that was on 7th gen hardware. In any case, we're still getting a full scale solar system (or at least a couple?) that are in fact, hand crafted. It's exciting to say the least.
So while I don't think Starfield is going to change the industry, and I fully expect bugs, I do think this is going to be the best example of procedural generation going forward and what it CAN do for future titles. Whether from Bethesda, or other developers. The main thing here I'd like to point out is that Bethesda isn't looking at procedural generation as a core mechanic. They see it as a TOOL. And that's what it should be across the board. I fully expect players to not go full on exploring towards other star systems until late in the game which will take a bit. Hand crafted is still the most important aspect as it should be. But if done right, I believe it could serve well for replayability for years to come.
People give a lot of shit to BGS for Fallout 76. But remember this. The game was fixed. And every game before it has been acclaimed. Fallout 4 was a bit disappointing for most and I agree, but I do think the mods made up for it and the combat was a big step up versus Fallout 3. It was the weakest title, for a BGS game. Sure. But even then, it was VERY good compared to what was out at the time. They obviously still know what they're doing unlike other developers now.
Bethesda has a lot to prove these days. BG3 just came out, featuring an openworld with depth and freedom like never before. Cdpr made the witcher 3 a decade ago, and CP77 version 2 will be out in a few months. There was elden ring and a new zelda. The competition for open world is huge.
They have one selling point for starfield: it's a space sandbox. That will give them some tolerancy for lower quality. But the cyberpunk debacle last year and BG3 success this month will make a tight space for starfield to fit in.
From what you're writing, Bethesda can still rely on its fanatical fanbase. The last success of Bethesda was skyrim. How long will it go like this?
I am properly amazed at how people are forgiving with Bethesda compared to how ruthless they were with CDPR.
I mean... There were the previous 2 Baldur's Gate games. And actually quite a few RPGs from the same time period that were exactly like BG3 where it really matters in the scope and size of the world, and the depth of choices you had.
BG3 doesn't do anything new. It just does something that nobody has done since the fucking 90's, and did it with amazing graphics and voice talent.
I would argue the older ones are even just a slight bit more in depth, since they are entirely text and contain much more dialogue than 3, and more choices to match.
Besides, if you're comparing a Bethesda RPG, with their action-focused almost arcade version of an RPG to a classic D&D style CRPG like BG3... What are you even doing? They aren't remotely similar styles, and both can be fun for different reasons.
Like never before might be exaggerating. There were games even more recently. But not many. And not Bethesda games. And cdpr rpg are better action rpg in the recent years.
Bethesda did good games. But the last really good one was skyrim. And people often talk about morrowind as their best.
I don't doubt Bethesda can still rely on its fanbase, but I wonder why at this point.
Hmmm, but is Baldur's Gate 3 actually Open World though? It's multiple different Acts with pathways leading places. I feel like something like a GTA, Minecraft or Skyrim / Legend of Zelda more qualifies as Open World than the world of Baldur's Gate 3.
It depends on what you call an open world. If you take the most restrictive definition, then it is not an open world.
But that would be dishonest imo. There is a large difference between BG3 (or bg1 and 2) and mass effect for example. Is the witcher 3 an open world?
Somehow I feel like this is what bioware forgot along time. How to make open world.
Because Skyrim wasn't delayed 15 times or wasn't so buggy it was unplayable.
CP2077 was BAD. It was worse than Skyrim on release.
Hahahaha. Did you read that in the news? Or did you tried to play on a 10 year old console? Maybe you wanted gta12?
.....What?
They mean to say: Skyrim was so buggy at release, it was definitely close to unplayable. Even the latest patches don't fix some issues from day 1. (BUT: it's the only game from its era I can go back and play now and still be completely immersed)
Nah, I remember playing on day 1 and while it was really bad, it was still playable. But that's just me.