I find it interesting that people think Starfield is gonna be so popular when the last few Bethesda games weren't that good. I'm gonna vote Baldurs Gate 3 and Tears of the Kingdom, Street Fighter 6, and Spider Man 2. Starfield is giving me slight Duke Nukem Forever vibes. Ot kindnof bothers me that it releases next month yet has no demo, hasn't been shown much, hasn't gone gold and has a veil of secrecy around it when Microsoft itself is not very secretive when their games don't have problems.
Bethesda's RPGs rarely have demos and has been shown substantially in a deep dive at 'E3'. Strange how you earlier claimed it was a 'known quantity' but have now pivoted to 'we know nothing about this game'.
There's no veil of secrecy. It's getting another big feature at Gamescom, and will have marketing ramp up this month ahead of release.
And Starfield being an unknown property? Weren't they working on this for the span of Duke Nukem Forever? It's been what, ten years since they started working on Starfield?
Starfield has been in development since 2016. They've stated they commenced development after Fallout 4.
I have no idea what you see as common elements between this title and Duke Nukem Forever.
Here's a question. How far would Starfield go if they locked up all mods to the game? Everyone talks about Mods being the reason why Bethesda games are so loved, but what happens if under Microsoft Mods are no longer allowed to make way for DLC, Micro Transactions and any number of Expansions? Mods would be a problem for this so the easiest way to "fix" this would be to stop mods all together.
I'd really like to believe even you know this is complete nonsense
Another question I would add is how complete is a Bethesda game without mods? Does anyone actually like their games in their base form? I always hear about mods for Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 4. How are these games without their mods? I always found Bethesda games to be underwhelming without community input. But what do I know? I'm probably just getting jaded as I get older and have less tolerance for someone else fixing someone elses shit or having to wait for someone else to make another work playable.
Launch Skyrim had 94 and 96 percent scores on Metacritic for PC and Xbox 360 respectively, dozens of GOTY awards and sold 10 million units within a month of release, thanks to strong word of mouth.
how you find games you haven't personally played 'underwhelming'?
Here's one thing to consider for hype.
This is the Starfield Trailer. This is the official gameplay trailer from Bethesda. This trailer has reached 2.1 million views in one month.
This is the Spiderman 2 Trailer. This is the official story trailer from Sony. This trailer has reached 12 million views in TWO WEEKS.
The hype for Starfield feels overblown. Nobody is really talking about it in the way Microsoft wants it to. View numbers speak heavily. I question the true amount of hype that Starfield actually has.
Pretty much every BG3 video on Larian's youtube channel has less than 600k views...including the BG3 launch trailer. And yet it's doing impressive numbers on Steam. By your logic, BG3 should have had a tepid launch.
Preorders and wishlist position on Steam for Starfield already show the hype is real, but you'll probably learn this in a month.
Finally, the thread title is about GAF hype levels. The only metric to use here is the poll in the OP.
Personally, I'm hyped for both titles. Both should be excellent AAA open world releases that help to push the medium forward. I don't see the sense in attempting to de-market one to elevate the other.
