People keep complaining about it, but i am enjoying the shit out of it. Just passed the 100 hour mark, and i havent even touched the faction questlines. I find the exploration very satisfying, the side quests well done and the main story… acceptable. I like the procedural genration, theres no way in hell a game of this scope could exist without it. The ship building is complex and satisfying, the ship combat is also fun, if somewhat basic. It has the same heart and soul as any bethesda game, if you like their other games i would highly reccomend Starfield.
Comment on Oh, now that's just wrong!
goat@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
is starfield worth the pricetag?
RavindraNemandi@ttrpg.network 1 year ago
Renacles@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
I love it, it took me a while to really get into it but it was well worth it.
My best suggestion would be to ignore the main story and follow side quests, that’s the real meat of the game.
Exploration is a mixed bag, if you are expecting Skyrim where you can get lost going in any direction you are going to be disappointed. The planets are mostly empty but incredibly well made from a space simulation standpoint, I spent a while just traveling the solar system and taking pictures of cool places I found.
loobkoob@kbin.social 1 year ago
I think following the main quest until the first temple is a good idea, personally. After that, you're in a pretty good spot to decide whether you want to pursue the main quest line more or focus on side quests.
Renacles@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Yeah, that’s a good point to go do something else. I do wish the game was better at explaining how it’s systems work though, I’m still figuring stuff out 80 hours in.
docclox@lemmy.world 1 year ago
No regrets here :)
trustnoone@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
I mean, I got it as part of Xbox gamepass so in a way it’s freeish (and in a bigger more tangible way it’s not lol). I’m enjoying it, first 12 hours sucked and I nearly dropped it, but it got much better.
Just an imo, it’s very similar to fallout 4 I’d say. Nothing more, nothing less. There isn’t some amazing questlines or a complete reimagining of the formula. Just change stuff to space, and remove maps to become this shitty starfield system and there you go. So it depends if you enjoyed fallout 4.
Blamemeta@lemm.ee 1 year ago
It is, its pretty fun. Its just also fun to make fun of it
stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Here’s a brief review
$70
Main story beaten comfortably in 20-30 hours.
Consensus: but no man sky instead
docclox@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Here’s a brief review
$100
Still playing at NG+3 after 200 hours. Still finding new things daily. Having a whale of a time.
Consensus: but no man sky instead
Consensus: No Man’s what now?
stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world 1 year ago
No man’s sky similarly had a rough launch in terms of empty promises, bugs, lack of meaningful side content but ended up being recovered by another company and has been producing non stop updates, patches, and major updates ever since and has topped the leader board for most played games on the steam deck
I’m not bashing anyone else’s feelings on this topic, I personally just feel like this was way more empty than any of bethesdas other games like fallout 4.
Not to mention all the other games that were pushed off so they could work on their “masterpiece”
The facial rigging and animations are constantly bugged or straight up nightmarish (par for the course, shit happens, I’ll give it a pass)
Not to mention the settlement system which is somehow less than what the settlement system was in fallout 4 and 76.
And if this companion tells me to stop picking up junk one more time I’m putting her in the god damn air lock
docclox@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I’m not bashing anyone else’s feelings on this topic
Well you say that …
pushed off so they could work on their “masterpiece”
But you have to admit, the sarcastic tone does come across as a little belligerent.
I mean you rushed the main story, and decided the game wasn’t for you, and that’s fair enough. But there’s a huge amount of stuff that no-one is going to be able to come to grips with in 20 hours, and I say based on having ten times that amount and still finding new things. So entitled as you are to give your opinion, I hope you’ll forgive me if offer my own by way of contrast.
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Starfield is wide as an ocean, and as deep as a thimble.
Exploration quickly gets tiresome, Most the quests are decidedly average, and every mechanic in the game feels like they stopped and said good enough half way through development, and there are mechanics that were very obviously abandoned but left in the game as vestigial annoyances… Its very reminiscent of Cyberpunks release, imho.
So my personal suggestion, if you must buy a game to play right now, is to buy something else, and come back to Starfield in a year, and hopefully by then they’ve listened to player feed back and made some drastic improvements to the game, story, and mechanics… Or if you don’t want to wait a year, then at least wait until after the creation kit is released.
IMHO, Its the weakest game Bethesda has ever released, and doesnt even hit the engaging Bethesda points that previous games excelled at.
goat@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
what do you think is the best Beth Esda game?
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I would say New Vegas, but thats kind of cheating since Bethesda only published it, didnt make it.
As for Bethesda made games… I really don’t have a favorite, per se… Previous games all scratch the same itch in their own unique ways, Depending on what you’re wanting on your plate at the moment since they are all fairly decent at hitting good highs and lows with beautifully designed worlds that reward exploration. Even with the internet and wiki’s listing out everything know, I still find things in TES/FO that I never knew about before.
They have that real great sense of wonder and splendor as you are wandering their worlds, dealing with interesting fights, etc.
Which is one of the many reasons why Starfield missed the mark. There is no sense of wonder or exploration. With the previous games, You could wander from one major settlement, to another… might be a 5 minute trip between the two points real time, but it takes hours to get there cause you keep discovering new points of interest, new locations, new random emergent interactions, and getting sidetracked by all of them and ending up looking at the clock and going “Holyshit its THIS late?! how did that happen?!”
In Starfield, you just… get on your ship and jump from Point A to B, the only “exploration” being running from your ship across a mostly empty void to the quest marker. Yeah, you could poke around the map, if you are doing surveys or looking for PoIs, but theres such an astonishing lack of variety in the PoIs you quickly learn to recognize them from a distance, and know not to bother cause the 100th one you clear is exactly same as the first, with the only difference at all in the enemies that spawn in relation to your level, but still be very week and easily die.
And I want to be clear, This isnt comparing games with 5 years of patches and content additions to DLC. I’ve played most of Bethesdas modern games day 1, and I will absolutely admit that those games were buggy, crashtastic messes, While Starfield has been remarkable stable (only had like 5 crashes in 100+ hours of play, all on fast travel, which apparently was a bug that could be bypassed by disabling steam overlay).
I don’t have any hate for Starfield, though. I’m just enormously disappointed that it doesnt even measure up to its predecessors, which did more with less, both computer hardware wise and design wise.
MacedWindow@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Thanks for posting this. The way you describe getting lost on the way in other bethesda games is something I was having trouble putting into words myself.
Chailles@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I personally disagree with New Vegas as the best Bethesda game. The qualities that people like the most about Bethesda, namely the open world and getting lost in it vibe, is least present in New Vegas.