this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
107 points (86.9% liked)

Games

16722 readers
429 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mandy@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ou for fucks sake people, games dont have to be perfect tens Its okay to be a 8/10 or 7/10

[–] nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The funny thing is that "Publisher Bethesda was not permitted to pay additional royalties for the RPG because it scored 84 on Metacritic, according to Fallout New Vegas developer Chris Avellone. It appears that Obsidian's publishing contract included a deal that meant the studio would be issued bonuses if the game hit a Metacritic of 85." scores matter to Bethesda a lot even enough to ruin relationships and screw developers.

[–] Mandy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

i know that one, and my comment was 100% not about that none, really just about people really

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think Bethesda knows how to make one game in different settings, sadly that game was most popular in the early 10s.

[–] eochaid@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

What a wierd take, given that people STILL play Skyrim, Morrowind, and Fallout games in droves to this day. And that there are a ton of YouTubers that have made careers exclusively off of Beth lore and build videos and such.

Also given the post is about the game shifting to "mostly positive" on Steam. Which means the vast majority of reviews on steam are actually positive. And a lot of the negative reviews have to do with performance and technical issues, not the gameplay itself.

Also the fact that other "open world story-based shooters with rpg and crafting mechanics" are actually really popular - you know like Cyberpunk, or Mass Effect, or RDR2, or arguably, Jedi Survivor.

If you don't like Beth games, that's fine. They're not for everyone. But it doesn't mean your opinion is universal.

[–] hypelightfly@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think this is an accurate way to put it. I happen to like that game but if it's not what you were expecting or you're tired of it you're not going to like the game.

I have to say the best change from FO4 is ditching the voiced protagonist. That was a big mistake at the time.

[–] dmrzl@programming.dev 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is the score of Starfield really the only gaming topic Lemmy has to offer since like 4 days?

[–] doctorcrimson@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Some of it is organic hype and some of it is Corporate Funded social media teams / personnel who do their best to control the online narrative. Happens every time a Triple A game launches, no matter how many times that Company has betrayed it's audience and succumbed to greedy scummy practices. People even still talk about Activision Blizzard titles as if it won't just be another cashgrab.

Personally, I'm always super skeptical about these sort of games having a positive reception. I think the fast decline in user scores since launch is a perfect example of how unreliable the hype is.

[–] NickNak@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's a giant push to really hate on Starfield, all over the internet

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Yeah, and I don't get why. We quite literally got exactly what we expected with Starfield, and nobody said we would get anything different. For those of us who enjoy it, we got precisely what we were promised. For those who don't enjoy it, nobody tried to pretend they were getting something different.

If I have one complaint, they did not manage to brand it as effectively as they branded Fallout (the blonde cartoon, music, etc). But then, they never managed to brand tES that way and we're all still alive.

My 2c. Isn't it a breath of fresh air that we got a complete game without $100s in day1 DLC required to make it playable?

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

Probably a big part of the hate comes from Playstationers, who cry about exclusives now that they are on the short end.

[–] NickNak@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

I remember people hating on Skyrim when it came out, then Fallout 4, surprisingly not Fallout 76, you are right they never lied about it or promised stuff we didn't get, I don't really have interest in the game so I haven't been following it to much but I don't recall there being any classic Toddisms either

Starfield is as Generic Bethesda as it gets(which is a good thing) they didn't introduce shit from other AAA games, like you said, no annoying Battle pass, day one DLC etc and other than early access, was there preorder bonuses?

The hate just seems odd, I can get the hate for most AAA shit but it seems really misplaced for StarField

You're right about the branding, nothing to me sticks out for the series's brand, maybe they didnt want another vault boy esq thing, so the game could stand alone, I dont know

Also, I guess also the cutscenese/animations everywhere, launching ships, docking, landing can get annoying, I understand the complaints about those

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] pory@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You did have to pay $100 to play this one on day 1. The plebs that bought the $70 version had to wait a week.

[–] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

This pleb waited a few days and pays $10/mo for a bunch of games, including Starfield. I'm happy enough.

[–] poke@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Eh, guess I'll drop my review.

The game seems good and mostly well made, with the best hand-crafted environments I've ever seen from Bethesda.

But when it comes to the core gameplay loop, I feel like I've played this game already and I got bored very, very quickly.

It truly plays like Fallout 4 but with more menus and loading screens in order to fast travel somewhere. There is space combat, but it doesn't feel compelling to me. Click on bad ship until kaboom.

You want to fast travel? Drop some things, you can't fast travel while encumbered. Please undock first, we have some quest events tied to undocking and we don't want you to miss those. Please fast travel to the planet before landing at a location, we have some quest events tied to the space around planets and we don't want you to miss those.

Again though, the game is generally well made and I can see a lot of people truly enjoying it and the many gameplay systems you can dive into like settlement, ship, crew building, and side questing.

The slower-paced looter shooter gameplay loop just really isn't for me right now. I'd rather play Fallout or Borderlands.

Note that I haven't commented on the story. I don't feel like I've experienced enough of it to really give a good opinion on it. I've played 4 hours.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

It isn't really a slower paced looter shooter, hell I barely loot anything and talk my way out of most situations.

It is more of a story based RPG, where you carve your own story out of the game. You decide what kind of character you want to play, and which quests you follow and which you ditch, anything is permitted.

If the only thing you do is go inside a random dungeon, shoot anything that moves, loot anything that isn't nailed down and then go sell it, you won't have a great time.

If you want to enjoy the game more, I'd suggest to choose a trope for your character: diplomatic Federation Captain, cunning Bounty Hunter, vicious Space Pirate, hardened Space Trucker, curious Scientific Explorer, ...

Then find a quest line that synergies with your trope and follow it all the way through. Making decisions based upon how your character would react, not just what option will give you the most loot or is the easiest to accomplish.

Starfield has all the scifi tropes imaginable, kind of like what Skyrim had with Fantasy.

Currently I am enjoying my interpretation of the backstory of Captain Jean-Luc Picard of Star Trek. Being as helpful as I can, making philosophical statements and trying to find a diplomatic solution to anything. I change the UC to be the Federation and the Vanguard to be Starfleet. And recreated the USS Enterprise to the best of my abilities.

I had a blast for the whole ~26 hours I played.

[–] echoplex21@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Aww man it’s actually a bummer to hear so many people are disliking the game. This has been the first game in a while where I’ve gotten hooked. I love the RPG elements in the game and the story has been brilliant. I’ve enjoyed games recently like Ragnarok and Control but this is the first one where I’m excited to just get back and sucked into the world. The last Bethesda game I played was actually Fallout 3 over a decade ago. It makes sense as Mass Effect is my favorite franchise and this feels like an evolution of that. My perfect game would probably be Starfield with ME: Andromeda combat.

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago

Aww man it’s actually a bummer to hear so many people are disliking the game.

... Mostly Positive.

[–] eochaid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I totally agree. I'm having a blast with this game. Imo, the best thing Beth has ever made (yeah, suck it Morrowind stans)

I think the problem is that this game has a bit of a slow burn. It took a bit for it to open up and make sense for me, more than most Beth games. I think over time the hate cycle will die down and people will get it on a steam sale and finally sink their teeth into it and after a couple of years it's going to be as beloved as Skyrim is today.

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

I think a big part of the problem is just hype cycles. People had expectations that were through the roof. They didn't tell you they had seamless transitions to space, and they didn't tell you they had BG3 caliber branching conversation trees (which we're a long way from being able to realistically do outside of a CRPG). But people seemingly expected that.

I watched the direct and we got basically what I expected (though the gunplay feels better than I expected. I definitely felt like VATS was needed in FO4.) It's Bethesda's game design philosophy of a massive world with a bunch of different play styles and a bunch of different quest lines (and smaller single quests) and locations that don't have to be done in any order. You can easily get sidetracked and go down rabbit holes. They iterated on most of their core features and adapted them to the new setting in a really well done way.

I also love the way the skill system brought back the "get better by doing" philosophy of Skyrim with challenges to unlock higher levels, and the story telling is sci fi in more than just skin.

[–] couragethebravedog@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Out of curiosity, have you played BG3 ? It seems that most people who don't like the game are coming to starfield right from BG3 and those who do have not played it. BG3 is now just the bar that AAA story telling is held to and anyone who has experienced it is having a hard time with the story of other games.

[–] echoplex21@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not gonna lie, I’m not a huge fan of turn based combat anymore. I feel like I’ve been burnt out after playing Pokémon for over 20 years.

[–] kittenspronkles@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I'm not a fan of turn based games either, but BG3 is an excellent game and worth a shot.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

I'm playing Baldurs Gate 3 with friends and Starfield singleplayer. And I am enjoying both.

They aren't the same game, even though they both rely on story and some aspects of the game are the same (like coming up with your own character and wanting to see how the story affects them)

[–] Pregnenolone@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I think I’m just getting old. Games like Starfield are boring the hell out of me. I played it for about 1.5hrs then uninstalled it.

[–] nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I did the same thing with fallout 4, I think it's just todd that's boring.

[–] Afrazzle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

It's been in the top 10 (and often in top 5) concurrent players on steam since release so I think you just don't like it, but many others still do.

[–] Delusional@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Because they've been making the same game just with different settings for 20+ years and it been overused. You may have fun with the game if you didn't play the last few Bethesda games or you still enjoy that type but it is stale for most who have played fallout 3, nv, 4 and the elder scrolls games for most of their lives. There's just nothing new.

[–] DCLXVI@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You must have such a refined taste to not waste more than 90 minutes on starfield. May I recommend Elden Ring or Baldur's Gate 3 for a discerning individual such as yourself.

[–] altima_neo@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

I think it's that other games have done cooler stuff, while Bethesda keeps making the same game with a different skin.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

If you can already know the game is boring after 1.5 hours, the game is indeed not for you.

I thought it was yet an other boring scifi shooter, but gave it a try after seeing someone else playing it. Then I saw how much of a Star Trek TNG vibes it had.

[–] kemsat@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

If this game had dropped in 2016, I’d be ecstatic. But… I played Elden Ring & it felt a bit like a modded Skyrim, that was better than Skyrim. Now, Bethesda games feel stale.

[–] jopepa@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Does this mean they get no bonuses and obsidian gets a turn again?

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Best walkingsim/exploration rpg I've played this decade by a longshot.

[–] loutr@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Haven't played the game yet, but I see everywhere that exploration sucks because all the planets are empty and look the same?

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 6 points 1 year ago

There are plenty of moons/planets with life and interesting things to see, but yes there are a lot of "barren" moons and whatnot. The game tells you what to expect when you click on a given object. It will tell you if there are flora and fauna, what the temperature is, what minerals to expect, that kind of thing. From what I can tell there is almost always some sort of structures/bases on the planets as well.

[–] eochaid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nope, not true in the slightest. There's actually a lot of variety in biomes, flora, fauna, characteristics - and a lot of them even have multiple biomes with different life per biome.

What i expect people are complaining about is one of two things:

  1. Planet scanning is boring.
  2. On noes generated dungeons

To the first point, I agree planet scanning gets pretty boring if that's all you do for 5 hours straight. But there's a TON of content in this game. Switch it up. Once you're done with a mission, go explore the planet you ended up on and scan the things. Or don't. Who cares. Planet scanning isn't necessary at all. I think a lot of people see that planet scanning gives you a ton of credits and xp, go grind that one thing, and then complain that it's boring.

On the second point, yes every planet will have a bunch of locations that are like "Cave" or "Covered Crater" or "Abandoned Facility" and such. A lot of them are small resource troves, but the facilities actually feel pretty handbuilt - if you check them out. But I think a lot of people see "Abandoned [whatever]" and think "oh autogenerated content, meh" without checking it out. I certainly have been guilty of that. But every time I actually decide to go in, I'm surprised at how much fun I actually have in those environments, how much environmental storytelling is actually there, and how well built the levels are. I feel like they hand built a bunch of these or components of them and an engine puts it all together.

The reality is that every Beth game ever has used procedural generation. And they've been getting better at it with each game. Skyrim felt less empty that Oblivion. Starfield feels less empty, overall anyway, than Skyrim. The handbuilt hub planets are way busier than any location in Skyrim. The procedural worlds feel more empty than skyrim for sure, but it makes plenty of sense, theres still plenty to do, and the amount of planets makes it feel less empty. And overall, there's a LOT more handbuilt and story content than skyrim - by several factors imo.

I'll also point out that the procedural content is just flavor. You don't need to engage in it but it's there if you want it. This game has a TON of handbuilt content - more than any other Beth game. The faction quests feel like a full game in their own right. The side quests are plentiful and quite deep. Complaining about procedural content in this game feels like complaining about the number of leaves on a tree.

[–] neokabuto@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There's both too much and too little stuff on planets. The random outposts it spawns are kind of boring but it's annoying when I want to put down an outpost and the game has randomly put someone else on the best spot. But when I want to get to them, there's a long walk for pretty much nothing.

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

You can complain a lot about Starfield, but it has some of the most aggressive fast travelling options available to date. If you are walking a lot, it means you don't understand the mechanics.

You can literally look at a waypoint and teleport to it.

I went from inside a dungeon, and teleported all the way to the commercial district on a different planet in a different system to sell everything in like 10 seconds.

load more comments
view more: next ›