I hope Starfield's reception marks the end of all huge empty open worlds in gaming.

Gaf is also against way smaller open world filled to the brim with stuff to do and full of enemies on the map like horizon, it seems like gaffers have no idea of what they want from open world games really, or they just look who the developers are before speaking up...

They hate copy paste stuff but somE Recent titles got a pass for that...

Devs can't win here.
 
Last edited:
Them deciding to not have alien colonies to locate, explore, learn about, trade and communicate with was a collosal mistake.

Talking to only humans whos only visual difference is the color and design of there space suit is gonna get old fast in a single game not to mention what Bethesda hopes to be a successfull franchise wirh multiple entries.
 
Last edited:
CGNoire said:
Them deciding to not have alien colonies to locate, explore, learn about, trade and communicate with was a collosal mistake.

Talking to only humans whos only visual difference is the color and design of there space suit is gonna get old fast in a single game not to mention what Bethesda hopes to be a successfull franchise wirh multiple entries.
Click to expand...
ok...

They said this years beforehand.

There are no aliens in this game. At least not in the NPC sense.
Nothing wrong with that.
 
MMaRsu said:
They said this years beforehand.

There are no aliens in this game. At least not in the NPC sense.
Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...
Yes they did and its still a poor decision.

Nothing moraly wrong of course but there still consequences. I bet money this series will be nowhere near as popular longterm as Fallout/ElderScrolls where cause of this decision unless of course the sequel changes course.

I still think a massive RPG should have more variety than this has shown potential for and should promote highly motivated exploration beyond seeing cool colored planetary sunset #765539 or collecting resources for mostly cosmetic reasons. Idk its probably funner than that but still its potential seems squandered here.
 
Last edited:
CGNoire said:
Yes they did and its still a poor decision.

Nothing moraly wrong of course but there still consequences. I bet money this series will be nowhere near as popular longterm as Fallout/ElderScrolls where cause of this decision unless of course the sequel changes course.

I still think a massive RPG should have more variety than this has shown potential for and should promote highly motivated exploration beyond seeing cool colored planetary sunset #765539 or collecting resources for mostly cosmetic reasons. Idk its probably funner than that but still its potential seems squandered here.
Click to expand...

Holy shit my guy there is so much content in the game, who gives a shit if you see a random generated sidequest again. That shit happens in Skyrim too.

Sounds like you haven't even played it.
 
MMaRsu said:
Holy shit my guy there is so much content in the game, who gives a shit if you see a random generated sidequest again. That shit happens in Skyrim too.

Sounds like you haven't even played it.
Click to expand...
Quanity of content doesnt interest me. The quality of content does and I dont believe a space game that takes place across multiple star systems will ever reach its potential without alien colonies to explore, learn about and trade with. JMO

I havent played it but Bethesda has shown what they thought would be enticing and it failed to excite me. Infact my hype has been plummeting ever since.

Im just stating my predictions. Im super sad at some of the decisions made here is all. I will of course get it either way since Im a huge Bethesda RPG fanboy but Im still not exspecting much unfortunatly.
 
Elysion said:
What Starfield desperately needs are vehicles. Buggys, hoverbikes, mechs, boats, submersibles, you name it. Anything to cover large distances quickly, which would make exploration more fun and make the planets feel less empty. I don't understand why they left this out of the game. Imagine if RDR2 or Witcher 3 didn't have horses. Just bizarre.
Click to expand...

LOL. You can't explore the planets like Bethesda implied, it creates a cell and if you wanna reload a new one you have to get back to your ship and go to the planet again. Vehicules wouldn't work the way the game was designed. It's just fake exploration, freedom to go anywhere with constraints.
 
cripterion said:
LOL. You can't explore the planets like Bethesda implied, it creates a cell and if you wanna reload a new one you have to get back to your ship and go to the planet again. Vehicules wouldn't work the way the game was designed. It's just fake exploration, freedom to go anywhere with constraints.
Click to expand...
Where was it 'implied' everything would be seamless?

There is no 'fake' exploration. The map it generates is twice the size of a Skyrim map.

Any expectations of seamless planet exploring are made up by you in your own head.
 
RayHell said:
You're missing the point. Stating that you shouldn't have a user opinion on the game because the media outlet review said it's good is kinda dumb . If it was the case they wouldn't bother to make a user review section. And most of the time in retrospective I find myself leaning more on the user review score than the media one.
Click to expand...
I never once said that someone shouldn't have a user opinion. Didn't even imply it.

What I'm saying is that for Metacritic the user score is worthless because people don't have to be a user to submit a user score. Metacritic user reviews for popular games are always just another playground to fight on in the console war. It's why Metacritic in general is unreliable. Steam user reviews are better because they reveal how long someone has played the game and you can more easily dismiss those that are clearly review bombing.
 
Last edited:
CGNoire said:
Them deciding to not have alien colonies to locate, explore, learn about, trade and communicate with was a collosal mistake.

Talking to only humans whos only visual difference is the color and design of there space suit is gonna get old fast in a single game not to mention what Bethesda hopes to be a successfull franchise wirh multiple entries.
Click to expand...
Agree totally with this, or even alien races to fight with, there are aliens in The Fallout games, why not in a BGS space game, unless its a future dlc,
 
Last edited:
Madflavor said:
I think Starfield is unfortunately going to be one of those overhyped games that's going to have a particularly hard hitting Post-Honeymoon period for a lot of folks. It looks like plenty of fun, I'm looking forward to playing it, but I have my expectations set according. It just seems like it's a fine Space RPG. For me that's good enough. But this game was clearly marketed and hyped up as a game changer. A once in a generation type of Open World RPG. I don't think that'll be the case. The amount of loading screens, the way you transition from planet to planet, the ugly drab look of the environment and NPCs, the outdated RPG mechanics, the outdated game engine, the braindead AI, etc.

There's some potential for incredible mods to be born from this. Fallout 4 had some great mods that vastly improved the game. But as it stands right now, the base game from what I've been watching a lot of, doesn't seem like a serious system seller.
Click to expand...
B...B...But, it's already a serious system seller. It's selling consoles and Gamepass subs. What do you mean, exactly?
 
Vblad88 said:
If this planet emptiness have some grounds in the story than ok, if it is just a "realistically fitting content filler"... why even bother... Would anybody play Tomb Raider or watch Indiana Jones if it would feature realistic presentation of true archeological work? C'mon...
Click to expand...
Being able to travel from planet to planet, find cities, colonies, creatures to fight etc is already unrealistic.
 
The issue with every open world sandbox space game is they limit the game to rocky moons and worlds for the sake of "realism". When in reality it means making the game easier to design.

If you could explore the chromosphere of stars, the outer shells of gas giants, super nova remnants, get close to black holes, worm holes, etc. all this would provide way more gameplay and visual variety.
 
MMaRsu said:
Where was it 'implied' everything would be seamless?

There is no 'fake' exploration. The map it generates is twice the size of a Skyrim map.

Any expectations of seamless planet exploring are made up by you in your own head.
Click to expand...

Man... I see you bringing this over and over again, I get it you love Starfield. One would think if you enjoy it so much you wouldn't be on forums but instead playing it lol.
Besides my reply was to the poster who wanted vehicules to explore, fact is you can't explore a planet that way... and you know damn well Bethesda pretended you could. It's not the first time they've been caught lying about their games.


384.jpeg



It's fake exploration to me. Better?
 
bigdad2007 said:
The issue with every open world sandbox space game is they limit the game to rocky moons and worlds for the sake of "realism". When in reality it means making the game easier to design.

If you could explore the chromosphere of stars, the outer shells of gas giants, super nova remnants, get close to black holes, worm holes, etc. all this would provide way more gameplay and visual variety.
Click to expand...
So much this.
 
At least Bethesda actually RELEASED the game in a timely manner with an AAA average budget and so far they only asking for the full game price. They could've used the hype to follow that scam space game and sink millions and millions into this relaying on the hype and never actually release the game.

For that I admire Bethesda on this one. Imagine Bethesda making you keep paying real money for imaginary insurance for your imaginary ship…
 
Games of Today said:
I think we're forgetting here that real space is... empty?

You know No Man's Sky already exists and is filled to the brim with horrendous looking creatures and plants on nearly every planet. I would beg for dead and barren worlds while playing that game.

People praise Red Dead 2 and I play a lot of it myself. But other than shooting wild animals, what is there really to do inbetween towns around most of the map? Pretty much nothing, it's pretty barren content wise.

It's not always a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Anyone else find irony in the name of this person?
 
To those who say the thousand empty planets is because Bethesda was aiming for realism, I'd say two things.

First, it's important not to get caught in binary thinking. People in the thread talk as if the choice is between 1) a thousand procedurally generated planets, devoid of anything interesting; and 2) six hand-crafted planets, all teeming with life. But it's not an either/or thing. You can have a middle ground with some procedurally generated planets (the "realism" of dull planets with nothing much to do), mixed with hand-crafted worlds that have rewarding exploration -- and by "rewarding exploration," no, I don't mean that the map is stuffed with goodies. That is another piece of binary thinking. Exploration is rewarding when it stokes curiosity, leads to discovery, when the environment is visually interesting, and when you are occasionally rewarded either with loot, side stories, or just something cool. That is not (outside the main quest and faction quests) what we have here. Bethesda chose option 1, and I wish they would have chosen a more middle-ground approach, rather than pure "realism" that reduces open-world exploration to tedium.

Second, I don't know about you, but I don't play games for realism. If I wanted reality, why would I play games? I play games for entertainment. And Bethesda games in particular have never been realistic. In fact, their best games have been their least realistic ones (e.g., Morrowind). Seems to me that they have chosen to sacrifice entertainment on the altar of "realism." Wandering a thousand planets with nothing to find except some copy/paste structures is not my idea of rewarding exploration.
 
Empty stuff? I just landed on Moon and had 2 points of interest at the beginning. While waking towards them another 5 appeared on the map. I stays on a random spot on the moon for like 2 hours clearing bases, exploring caves, while i was rewarded with some nice epics guns and helmets and finding some rare resources for crafting...

Empty world my ass....
 
KuraiShidosha said:
Starfield cemented in my mind the fact that space is boring. Skyrim is plenty fun to run around and explore, Fallout too. It's space that just isn't compatible with human exploration while making it interesting.
Click to expand...
Just playing devils advocate here, but maybe Bethesda purposefully chose space instead of a terrestrial setting because of this very fact that space is mostly empty, lifeless and boring and that falls perfectly in line with procedurally generated content?
 
CGNoire said:
Them deciding to not have alien colonies to locate, explore, learn about, trade and communicate with was a collosal mistake.

Talking to only humans whos only visual difference is the color and design of there space suit is gonna get old fast in a single game not to mention what Bethesda hopes to be a successfull franchise wirh multiple entries.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that decision baffled me. A SF game spread throughout the galaxy, but without alien races? Seems like a rather unimaginative world.
 
Starfield is not really an open world game.

I thought I'd check it out and can't find anything from BGS where they promote it as such. They bill it as an RPG. Maybe there are interviews I'm missing that say otherwise?

When you move past it not being a seamless open world it becomes a better experience.
 
Guilty_AI said:
Its car gmod basically 🤷‍♂️. Whoever think of it as a mere physics simulator just hasn't played it properly
Click to expand...
Gmod also isn't as much of a game as it is a sandbox/social platform.
Not saying that it isn't fun, or that BeamNG is bad, but it is lacking a good singleplayer campaign that games like Most Wanted and Forza Horizon are known for. It's a problem i have with Assetto Corsa too.
 
Last edited:
64bitmodels said:
Gmod also isn't as much of a game as it is a sandbox/social platform.
Not saying that it isn't fun, or that BeamNG is bad, but it is lacking a good singleplayer campaign that games like Most Wanted and Forza Horizon are known for. It's a problem i have with Assetto Corsa too.
Click to expand...
Having one would be nice but often don't really need one, FS2020 being another example of this.

Still, the original point is about open world racing games benefiting from large worlds, and this game definitely benefits from large maps. Even gigantic ones composed 99% of sand can be fun

 
Last edited:
I don't understand, space IS empty, we know this and Bethesda tried to stay believable in their universe construction. You are going to tell me that you oreferred something like no man's sky? A game about discovering the universe where every single planet in the 3 galaxy you can visit have always someone already rhere? The reality of things is that 99.9999% of planets are empty. Even if you can you don't need to go in any single one of them to go around searching for something... it is just bs.

The universe is there to be a stage for the actual rpg that the game want to be.

I'm so sick and tired of ppl with adhd trying to destroy everything I love about videogames.
 
ReBurn said:
I never once said that someone shouldn't have a user opinion. Didn't even imply it.

What I'm saying is that for Metacritic the user score is worthless because people don't have to be a user to submit a user score. Metacritic user reviews for popular games are always just another playground to fight on in the console war. It's why Metacritic in general is unreliable. Steam user reviews are better because they reveal how long someone has played the game and you can more easily dismiss those that are clearly review bombing.
Click to expand...
I didn't said you implied that, I was explaining to you the point you missed from my first response to the other guy comment. Metacritic user reviews are a battleground yes but this still represent real people because it's real people. Haters get counterbalanced by fanboys. Take the Last of Us 2 for example. Press score 93, user score 58. This game is very polarizing. If I ask my surrounding who were fan of the first one they will either love it or hate it at almost 50/50 because of the story. This is way more accurate representation of the real world than the press review. It's the Academy Award vs blockbuster movie story all over again.
 




He does a good job of summing it up near the end. Basically, forget about exploration. It's boring and unrewarding. Stick to the main quest and faction quests, and you'll have an enjoyable 30-40 hours.
 
Last edited:
Reznor said:
An 88 on OpenCritic and mostly positive reviews should scare other developers from making open-world games? I don't understand where you're going with this.

Also, is it barren or is it filled with checkboxes of stuff to do? Which one is it?
Click to expand...
Yup.

I'll add this thread to the ignore list of pointless Starfield threads.
 
cripterion said:
Man... I see you bringing this over and over again, I get it you love Starfield. One would think if you enjoy it so much you wouldn't be on forums but instead playing it lol.
Besides my reply was to the poster who wanted vehicules to explore, fact is you can't explore a planet that way... and you know damn well Bethesda pretended you could. It's not the first time they've been caught lying about their games.


384.jpeg



It's fake exploration to me. Better?
Click to expand...

This I agree with. The vision is so limited by the engine here. They did what they could. It's loading screen after loading screen. If it wasn't for the semi-quick load times, I would have dropped the game. With that said, I'm still enjoying it.
 
Last edited:
Represent. said:
Yup. Devs, shrink the size of your fucking game. No one gives a shit about huge, massive, empty worlds.

Bitching about huge ass empty worlds with nothing to do but scan rocks and trees is nothing? Lol.
Click to expand...
Zelda has big ass empty open worlds and people love that, don't they? I have never been more bored walking around in BOTW and TOTK and I have put roughly 50 hours into both.
 
Evil Calvin said:
Zelda has big ass empty open worlds and people love that, don't they? I have never been more bored walking around in BOTW and TOTK and I have put roughly 50 hours into both.
Click to expand...
Zelda is garbage to me too. Its Empty and ugly as fuck.

GTA V, RDR 2 and Horizon Forbidden West have the best open worlds in my eyes. Waiting on the expansion to try CyberPunk.
 
DJ12 said:
Sarcasm or deluded. Given you post history I'm guessing deluded.

For starters game was delayed 2 to 3 times....
Click to expand...
And? That's still the industry average. AAA games in this industry get delayed left and right.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Wheel of Time Open-World RPG Video Game in the Works
News 
9
332
IDKFA replied
The Outer Worlds 2 Pre Orders Open Sunday
News  2
63
606
Negotiator101 replied
I hope Playground Games improve the replays in Forza Horizon 6!
Opinion 
19
420
Insanemaelstrom replied
Is the only way to justify the price of a game is for it to be open world?
14
291
StreetsofBeige replied
Marvel burnout/Wolverine reception
2
82
1K
rkofan87 replied
Top Bottom