The problems with Starfield aren't so much the bugs as they are fundamental, often dated, design issues. Here's a sort of Let's Play from a podcast I follow with one guy who loves trying to bend sandbox simulations to the point of breaking and a gal who writes comedy. Around the 10m mark, you can start to see where this sandbox should have accounted for this kind of play. If you can't simultaneously do that while making a galaxy with 1000 planets, then you should probably scope down until you can. Starfield is not a terrible game, but Bethesda needs to evolve.
Games
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
The story is bad, the ship’s weapons selection is terrible, the outposts are almost useless, the temples are ridiculous, the powers are mostly unnecessary and soooo mmmaaannnyyy loading screens….
"Starfield is my dream game."
-Todd Howard
"The game is perfect, upgrade your ghetto ass computer." -Todd Howard
It's Skyrim with a coat of lead paint.
It's been clear for over a decade that the Creation Engine (let's be honest it's still Gamebryo) has run its course. It is not a viable option for a modern game anymore. It has architectural limitations that simply prevent a modern gaming experience.
There have been so many Creation Engine apologists since Oblivion trying to justify its continued existence through multiple new Fallout and Elder Scrolls games, always trying to say that it's fine. Starfield was the chance to prove that the limitations aren't actually architectural and that it could be used for a modern game. Clearly that's not the case. Taking just about any other modern open world RPG to directly compare, Starfield feels like crap in comparison. Hell, even the launch version of Cyberpunk felt better than Starfield does now.
It's been clear for over a decade that the Creation Engine (let's be honest it's still Gamebryo) has run its course. It is not a viable option for a modern game anymore. It has architectural limitations that simply prevent a modern gaming experience.
And yet, I'm having a blast with Oblivion Remastered. The problem with Starfield is that the writing sucks and the game loops aren't fun. Because of these things it's an unforgivable bore. Oblivion proves you'll trudge back and forth and deal with all the copied and pasted caves in the world if the story is engaging and the gameplay loop is fun. The dated engine has little to do with Starfield's problems.
one guy who loves trying to bend sandbox simulations to the point of breaking and a gal who writes comedy
Abby and Vinny from Giant Bomb Beastcast
It's not that it's outdated, oblivion does this sort of thing. It's that starfield just isn't good, and the older titles are better
It can be both. It was impressive when Oblivion had 7 different interlocking systems but none of them were particularly good, but these days, I think we expect at least one or two of them to be significantly better.
It was bound to happen, modders can't fix a soulless game. There's no interesting characters, factions, or world setting to grab anyone's interest.
I thought modders would have abandoned it sooner though.
It was incredibly mid. For something Bethesda hyped for over half a decade they sure made a bland game. Throwing aside all of the incredibly dated gameplay, you hit the nail on the head. It was boring
You can tell every faction was decided by a corporate committee inside Bethesda and Microsoft. They couldn't be too risky, couldn't come close to possibly offending one person or risk having slightly fewer gamers. That results in a boring as hell game. Everyone was too goddamn nice in the game. No one ever got mad at you. You could punch someone in the face and the response would be "hey, that's not nice" and then they would continue on. Hold on there don't want to possibly scare off a potential customer by having a realistic situation there.
Meanwhile a Bethesda game like Fallout 3 had its fair share of flaws, but gave you plenty of opportunity to decide if you wanted to be the good guy or not. Blow up a town? Kill off all residents of Tenpenny Tower, or whack all the ghouls that want to take up residence? Why not all of them? You decide!
It also wasn't afraid of locking players out of quests if they behaved like an asshole. I liked that, why would somebody try to work with you after you just gave them the proverbial finger?
Far better than 'oh golly, you just told me that I'm not a nice person. Well, that's not very neighbourly of you, but I'll pay you my life-long savings if you hop over to the next hub and return my package that I conveniently know is collecting dust over there, but can't be bothered to fetch myself'.
My biggest issues were that the world building felt so lazy, in that every faction essentially boiled down to Space America in various aspects. You got the Space American Liberal Authoritarian State, you got the Space American Cowboys, the Space American Technocrats, and the Space American Religious Fundamentalists. I found all of these factions kinda repugnant for one reason or another, and uninspired to boot, and so I never felt a pull to experience the world on a deeper level once I had gotten tired of the regular gameplay.
Modders could fix that, but why bother making it a mod when you could just make a whole new game from scratch for just a little more work?
I am a huge BGS and "game cinema" fan, and Starfield felt so... boring. Both the first bit I played before I dropped it, and YT videos to see what I was missing.
For lack of another explanation, its like all those fun side quests and nooks individual writers went crazy making lost their spark. Even ME Andromeda had more compelling bits.
So I can see modders shying away. Why put all that work into something one has no desire to replay, especially with the alternatives we have these days.
Starfield would be fine if there was a way to get from place to place without constant reloads. This is a limitation of the (ancient) engine the game is on, as I understand it.
The thing is, we already have games like No Man's Sky which do this very well. Starfield may have been better received if it came out 15 years ago, but against modern space games, it just sucks.
That's ignoring anything else wrong with the game, of course, and there is plenty. But I could get over a lot if it didn't feel like I was playing a menu instead of flying a spaceship at every change of scenery.
Freelancer would have been fresher in memory 15 years ago, and that's one that had seamless intra-system travel. Gameplay in Freelancer even flowed better than NMS for getting from orbit to orbit and having encounters or discoveries along the way. It just didn't have the on-foot gameplay. I had the same problem with loading screens in Everspace 2. Killed the flow. Whoever tries to do this again is going to have to make sure transitions are minimal.
And that's what I don't get about Starfield, conceptually. With this project scope, you're not competing well with NMS for ship-to-foot or orbit-to-surface transition, you're not doing better than Freelancer--a 20+ year old game--for all the in-space stuff, and the procgen hamstrings you with all the "Bethesda magic" their worlds are known for. It's like someone said "let's do Daggerfall in space" and went rigid top-down design with it, retrofitting whatever they could along the way to make a functional game around the procgen.
This is a limitation of the (ancient) engine the game is on, as I understand it.
Old engine isn't always bad. It is if you do like Todd and just slap more and more plugins and technology on top and call it a new engine, instead of fixing underlying issues or rewriting/updating old parts.
Which is why Starfield NPCs walk onto tables and become owls when the camera zooms into conversations, etc: It is the same code that is used in Skyrim and partly Oblivion. And Todd Howard doesn't want devs doing silly things like fixing twenty year old code, he wants new and bigger.
I bought it on confidence when it released. That was the last time I ever did this. I played 25 very boring hours and uninstalled it. It's very difficult to figure out how you can fail so spectacularly with such a budget, such a long development time, and such a carte blanche with making a new universe from scratch
They changed the recipe. Skyrim, Fallout 3 and 4, Oblivion, and Morrowind all had something in common: handcrafted environments densely packed with points of interest.
Starfield used procedurally generated content. It generates abandoned mines and outposts from a tileset and then drops you in the literal desert between them.
The thing for me is that it's a game about a guild of explorers, and the game is all fast travel. The bits you do "explore" were soulless.
As other people have complained, it's a space exploration game without the space nor the exploration
God how did they fuck that up? Who thought I'd want to fast travel there? Sure sometimes, but honestly I'd love it if it showed how many minutes to destination and then you started jumping.
You're in the pilots chair, you see 10 minutes to the other side of the galaxy where your mission is. You hesitate because that's far, but 2 minutes away is your home base anyway so might as well swing through and drop off some stuff, make sure the pumps and extractors are working. 6 minutes past that is that side quest you've been putting off, I guess we can do that too. You hit the jump button, stars whizz past. You go talk with your crew, get caught up on conversations. You jump back in the chair when the 20 second warning goes off. You jump out and arrive, but there is a weird signal on a nearby planet in this system...
Now THAT's the game i wanted. Altering one mechanic right there completely changes the entire style of the game. I will forever be annoyed that everything in the game is instant fast travel. Sure have a button there to skip if people want to, but personally I prefer to lay back and fully immerse myself
My main gripe with the universe of starfield is that it works on fallout logic, as in, everyone acts as if telephones and cameras don't exist, despite being 300 years in our fucking future without any tech loss.
That "don't you guys have phones?" Blizzard meme is ironically spot on here. They don't. Communication only happens face to face while out of a ship.
The other thing is how a lot of the game runs on "nobody cares". Alien ship showing up on orbit? Nobody cares. Another alien ship showing up and attacking you? Nobody saw it, nobody cares. Alien space magic? Nobody cares. Alien space magic being used to wreak havoc in a big city? Not a word on it, instant amnesia after the attack.
¯\(ツ)/¯ non-FOSS software shouldn’t expect volunteers
Fans patching the Bethesda games is as at least as old as Daggerfall, if not earlier. Daggerfall didn’t have Helseth and Barenziah as Dark Elves until fans fixed it. Pickpocketing in Morrowind is broken unless you use the code patch. The Oblivion leveling problem punishes you for playing the game.
Like every guide for every Bethesda game is going to start with download this unofficial patch, and the unofficial patches for the DLC, and this installer. They’ve relied on fans and treated the community like it’s an FOSS community, without realizing that without good product, the volunteers won’t come.
Yes, but that shouldn't be the norm, or an expectation, of the developer. "Oh, we don't need to worry about the game, the fans will just mod it and it'll bring us lots of money!"
Bethesda is such a garbage company. No idea why people buy these half assed games
Lol it's such a tremendously boring game with dated gameplay. Bless your little heart if you enjoy it, but it's a bland, middling game at best and flat out bad in many ways.
The base game is fine. Once. Its just fine. Once.
When you beat the game and go thru The Unity to a whole ass different dimension and not one single detail is different in any way. That's what kills the drive to go onward. Because the game was fine. Once.
The whole story is predicated on a multiverse that effectively doesn't exist. Except on 1 sidequest for Barrett.
I have almost 6500 hours in FO4, I played today.
I have maybe 300 hours in Starfield, can't be arsed to look. Haven't touched it in at least a year.
Bethesda knows how to make great games, but they chose not to. I don't know why.
That's my take.
Coming from a long time fan of Bethesda RPGs They have gotten way too comfortable relying on radiant quests and proc gen content. Those aren’t inherently bad, but the way they were implemented in Starfield was. What’s so fun about landing on a planet that appears the same as another a few light years away and seeing the same fucking cryogenics lab with the same layout, items, lore logs, and enemy placement? Chasing the same bounties for a paltry sum of credits (not that you’ll need them it’s easy to break the economy) or legendary loot that you’ll likely just sell (for credits you won’t use)? There are cool things like ship building that could be further fleshed out but so much of the game ended up undercooked and uninspired (space travel with your ship was a glorified screensaver in a game about space traversal for Christ’s sake).
I think if Starfield had come out 10 years ago it would have wowed people and been a classic. But now it just seems dated when you have other games doing RPG better (Cyberpunk 2077, Witcher 3, Baldurs Gate 3) and open world space better (No Mans Sky).
Starfield doesnt do RPG as good as those games, nor does it do open world space as well as No Mans Sky. I've heard it described as being as wide as an ocean but as deep as a puddle, and that doesnt seem far off to me.
I really hope Bethesda have paid attention and dont make the same kind of mistakes with Elder Scrolls VI. Big and empty is not the way to go.
Maybe it would have been better received 10 years ago but I don’t know about being beloved like the elder scrolls or fallout games. 10 years ago was Fallout 4 but even in Skyrim era, it’d be great graphics but without the wonderful whimsy
Starfield is too normal. Bethesda games excel when they take the weirdness of the world seriously. Starfield is too serious conceptually. Elder Scrolls, just the concept of everything being canon because of dragon breaks and other weird aedra/daedra/chim/godhead shenanigans lets writers write wild while it still fitting in as serious in universe
They’ve managed to do that well enough with Fallout even though it’s supposed to be alternate reality world. Still wacky even if not as lore interesting as TES
Starfield is too unimaginative of a sci-fi universe so far. It’s too normal and because of that, they can’t write whacky in a way that people buy into and love. So then they end up judging the game by its systems and mechanics and technical merit way more than they do elder scrolls games or fallout.
Also base/ship building is given too much focus for a single player game. These games aren’t pretty enough to be a single player game that gets beloved for base building like Animal Crossing
There is just so much potential... squandered.
Silly example- why are there elevators and LOADING SCREENS in New Atlantis - if you have enough jetpack or just abuse TCL, you can walk around the entirety of New Atlantis, without a single loading screen.
But for some reason Bethesda decided it needed some loading screens for no good reason whatsoever.
Damn dude, I'm glad you got so much out of FO4 I did one playthrough when it released and tried to play it again this year, barely got into it.
That's when Bethesda died for me, didn't find Skyrims simplifications all that good either but it was still a fun game
Feels like Bethesdas modus operandi is to make a game that appeals to everyone and that's unfortunately coming at the cost of its established fan base
The fundamental concept and theme of the game is trash. It literally makes everything you do meaningless, it inevitably leads to you becoming the jaded villain. It would be better if they had an end where you destroyed the universe shifting thing and were locked in one.
Literally just No Man's Sky but worse.
i don't even know how you could meaningfully mod Starfield. the game is rotten to the core, you would be better off making your own space rpg