this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
106 points (80.1% liked)

Starfield

2851 readers
2 users here now

Welcome to the Starfield community on Lemmy.zip!

Helpful links:

Spoiler policy:

Post & comment spoiler syntax:

<spoiler here>

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I must say it is not the best RPG out there, but I feel like it would have earned more. I personally have a lot of fun playing.

While it was not a Cyberpunk-grade overhype, I think it must still have been overhyped. Because if you see it as Skyrim with better graphics, it is pretty much what you'd expect.

Some of the common criticism seems to be intrinsic to the sci-fi genre. In Skyrim, you walk 100 meters and then you find some cave or camp or something that a game designer has placed there manually with some story or meaning behind it. And as a player, you notice that, because most locations in Skyrim feel somehow unique. Even though for example the dungeons have rooms that repeat a lot. Having a designer place them manually with some thought gives them something unique.

In interstellar sci-fi, a dense world like this is simply impossible. Planets are extremely large so filling them manually with content is simply not possible. And using procedural generation makes things feel meaningless. Players notice that fast. So instead, Starfield opted for having a few manually constructed locations that are placed randomly on planets, unfortunately with a lot of repetition. But that is a sound compromise, given the constraints of today's game development technology. The dense worlds that we are used to from other genres simply don't scale up to planetary scale, and as players, we have to get used to that.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] charred@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Honestly I haven't been looking at the public reception at all because I've been playing it since it released. I didn't even know people weren't loving it, it's exactly what I want from a Bethesda game and more (136 hours so far)

[–] Pohl@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Honestly I assumed that the critical reception would be middling, the zeitgeist is done with this studio and it’s games. Which is completely fair they are janky and weird and frankly often break in un-fun ways.

It’s a BGS game warts and all and I had a great time with it. I love these big, ambitious, broken games and this is a better than average one of them.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AProfessional@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

My complaints personally are just about bad dialogue and quest design. The world is hardly my biggest issue.

[–] ShadowRam@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

yeah, That's fair criticism. This dialogue and quests are pretty flat.

[–] jcit878@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm enjoying the game, but an annoying number of quests involve a pointless "go talk to this person to find out what to do", you get there and it's always some mundane instruction "go collect this thing from there". and you waste a few minutes for that

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] thesprongler@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Ratings are so hard to trust these days. Some people never play the game they are reviewing, others use it as an opportunity to enact some vendetta based on prior games, and some are worth reading. 77 is fair enough at this stage, but the only way to know for real is how the game feels for you.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Grass@geddit.social 2 points 1 year ago

I'm still sad that stellar overload failed. I easily put more hours in that and it never made it out of early access.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›