rofif
Can’t Git Gud
Well not shit sherlock. Starfield sold better than forspoken ?! NO WAY !86K reviews vs 4K. I'll take the fact that forespoken only has 4K reviews as a loss and that it did not sell well.
that hugely overhyped game !???
Well not shit sherlock. Starfield sold better than forspoken ?! NO WAY !86K reviews vs 4K. I'll take the fact that forespoken only has 4K reviews as a loss and that it did not sell well.
It depends of your definition of review bombing. The game was available to consumers since almost 3 months. With this thread, we have weekly, if not daily snapshots at times of the number of reviews and how many are good and bad. It seems that the progression was kind of constant degradation? And because there is more reviews, it has slowed down, but still down. At some point we talked about regions, as a lot of asian reviews(chinese I think) are bad compared to the US or Europe, but no real statistical work have been made about it. It should continue to get worse until some equilibrium will be reached, but the fact is that we got 76 748 good reviews in November and 84 317 when I looked at it today. Versus 36 931 bad ones in November and 48 147 today. So unless there is some long term cabal of people that really push for it, it should continue to go down until somewhere below 50%. Of course some patchs and mods should stop the bleeding before that happen, hopefully. I think that if this thread stay open long enough, it will go back to 80% or more one day, unless it is abandonned by Bethesda and Xbox, but working on fixing Redfall but not Starfield would be peak stupidity for me.It’s clear that it’s review bombing but what happened recently to make it reach mostly negative?
Starfield is 63%, not 66% (though Forspoken is 60%).Don't celebrate yet. Though Starfield score is lowering and Forspoken is rising.
Starfield is still at a 66% user score. Forspoken is at 63%.
Maybe Bethesda can run their mouth a bit more on social media.
This is cope. Take a look at the reviews. The negative reviews show many hours played, many in the hundreds.It’s clear that it’s review bombing but what happened recently to make it reach mostly negative?
It depends of your definition of review bombing. The game was available to consumers since almost 3 months. With this thread, we have weekly, if not daily snapshots at times of the number of reviews and how many are good and bad. It seems that the progression was kind of constant degradation? And because there is more reviews, it has slowed down, but still down. At some point we talked about regions, as a lot of asian reviews(chinese I think) are bad compared to the US or Europe, but no real statistical work have been made about it. It should continue to get worse until some equilibrium will be reached, but the fact is that we got 76 748 good reviews in November and 84 317 when I looked at it today. Versus 36 931 bad ones in November and 48 147 today. So unless there is some long term cabal of people that really push for it, it should continue to go down until somewhere below 50%. Of course some patchs and mods should stop the bleeding before that happen, hopefully. I think that if this thread stay open long enough, it will go back to 80% or more one day, unless it is abandonned by Bethesda and Xbox, but working on fixing Redfall but not Starfield would be peak stupidity for me.
Agreed. I give it 7/10. It does many things well. The unforgiveable thing that killed it from being good was the lack of exploration and the excitement of finding something and starting a quest that way. Even Fallout 4 had the magic of wandering into a new area, travelling off the beaten path and discovering new things. Starfield did have good gunplay, exciting faction quests with a ton of variety. Anyone who is a fan of Bethesda games should give it a try at least once. It's not an all time great and not the gamechanging exclusive Xbox needed, but it's not terrible.Nah....Starfield is in no way comparable to a Gollum game and hasn't been treated as such. Much of the criticism is deserved, but lots of people, like myself, enjoyed the game quite a bit. I don't need a "defense" for that.
Yeah, no amount of patching/mods can fix players biggest criticism: lack of exciting exploration and getting lost. It would have been much better off keeping it to several systems, with fleshed out worlds that were large enough to explore and get lost in. Any expansion should take place on a few planets with smaller quests and be like Far Harbor.I can't understand for the life of me why they still think Redfall has any life in it. And if the overall user score drops below a 60% for Starfield, I think MS and Bethesda should walk away from this game too. At some point, it's just not worth it.
Agreed. I give it 7/10. It does many things well. The unforgiveable thing that killed it from being good was the lack of exploration and the excitement of finding something and starting a quest that way. Even Fallout 4 had the magic of wandering into a new area, travelling off the beaten path and discovering new things. Starfield did have good gunplay, exciting faction quests with a ton of variety. Anyone who is a fan of Bethesda games should give it a try at least once. It's not an all time great and not the gamechanging exclusive Xbox needed, but it's not terrible.
Redfall was their first game at 70$ I think, first or almost first Series S/X exclusive and AAA game published by Xbox since their awful 2022. The blow to their image was hardcore. I think that doing was they promised, the DLC content, and fixing it is all about having some dignity than making money at this point. And maybe there is some corporate shenanigans too. Nadella talked about the game, and the reception had to be quite the surprise to him. So I can see Phil Spencer assuring him that "it will be fixed", and making sure of that somehow.I can't understand for the life of me why they still think Redfall has any life in it. And if the overall user score drops below a 60% for Starfield, I think MS and Bethesda should walk away from this game too. At some point, it's just not worth it.
Redfall was their first game at 70$ I think, first or almost first Series S/X exclusive and AAA game published by Xbox since their awful 2022. The blow to their image was hardcore. I think that doing was they promised, the DLC content, and fixing it is all about having some dignity than making money at this point. And maybe there is some corporate shenanigans too. Nadella talked about the game, and the reception had to be quite the surprise to him. So I can see Phil Spencer assuring him that "it will be fixed", and making sure of that somehow.
Steam is not the only storefront who sell Starfield, and MS and Bethesda have all the data they need, and more, concerning people use of their game. Who buyed it and why? How many hours? When do they stop, what do they don't like or redo each game session? On consoles, they even get to see how many people quit Starfield for Skyrim or Fallout, in real time, if they want to. How the game go from friend to friend, when that stop. In theory, the game should continue to be worked out for at least two reasons: making Gamepass feel more valuable as more time playing this game means that having Gamepass subs stay to be able to play it for "free", and like Fallout 76, and that point have been said by Bethesda themselves, prove that they care about it. IF they abandon the game now, the next Elder Scrolls will have some people not look at it regardless of quality, burned by Starfield. Walking away from a big open world like that would also mean losing a lot of potential money. A DLC can probably make a lot of money for them, if they fix the game image before it launches. Can they fix it is another question. But some people like it now, so they can't make it worse, I think. Hope.
Edited: for safety concerns. Who knows what will get people in their feels these days.Obligatory:
Merry Christmas everybody
For Redfall, better to let the team do something than kill the studio, and as long are they plan to do another game with them, they are only losing time. Starfield is another question. The game is big enough that simply fixing it and porting it in playstation should lead to a few millions sales IMHO. But this would lead to more questions than answers. No man sky and Cyberpunk did the right thing. Starfield can do the same, but this would mean basically no more game for the Series S/X generation from Bethesda, and I am not sure that Xbox want that. Mass effect Andromeda was in kind of the same situation, with a game that was weak but could lead to something. If Starfield do what they wanted to do, lead to a great Starfield 2, like GOW 2 or Uncharted 2 was to the first games, it would be perfect. But you can't do AAA easily now, and that would mean no Elder Scroll for 10 more years...Great points. I just wonder how much it'll cost MS to keep producing content for Redfall at this point. And how much it'll cost to really give Starfield what it really needs. Which is some big expansion and an overhaul so that mods can be more fully supported.
FTFYI give it an 8 because I'm a dirty traitorous green rat but thankfully due to Ass of Can Whooping generosity I'll be put through rigourous reeducation to put myself back on the path of righteousness
For Redfall, better to let the team do something than kill the studio, and as long are they plan to do another game with them, they are only losing time. Starfield is another question. The game is big enough that simply fixing it and porting it in playstation should lead to a few millions sales IMHO. But this would lead to more questions than answers. No man sky and Cyberpunk did the right thing. Starfield can do the same, but this would mean basically no more game for the Series S/X generation from Bethesda, and I am not sure that Xbox want that. Mass effect Andromeda was in kind of the same situation, with a game that was weak but could lead to something. If Starfield do what they wanted to do, lead to a great Starfield 2, like GOW 2 or Uncharted 2 was to the first games, it would be perfect. But you can't do AAA easily now, and that would mean no Elder Scroll for 10 more years...
They are fucked anyway. Skyrim was launched in 2011. For PS3 and X360. We will get GTA 6 before Elder Scroll 6. When they decided to make Starfield and not Elder Scroll, they naturally made that game go one gen of consoles later. The tech to do that, and do that well, don't exist yet. If Starfield was the success they wanted it to be, then they would do what they did with Skyrim: endless reeditions and ports. As it sadly failed to have the same impact, they have to fix that first. But now they are under Xbox. And Xbox have more money, but different goals than Bethesda. They can't allow another Fallout 76 scenario to occur. So we are looking at what, a 2030 date for Skyrim sucessor? They will have to support Starfield for Gamepass. I am sure that Xbox will periodically take some of their best people to help other studios for games that need it, like ID helped them for the shooting, or Gears of War team helping others studios in handling Unreal Engine 5. If Xbox was ambitious, they would grow 2 teams, one doing Elder Scrolls, and one working from Starfield to accomplish their ambitions. There is great potential in it. But the risk would be to fail at both. And yes, nobody want to wait even more for the next Skyrim. But at this point it is inevitable.And the bolded is why I think MS should make Bethesda move on from Starfield post-2024. You don't want Bethesda drowning in Starfield man. None of us want that.
I can't understand for the life of me why they still think Redfall has any life in it. And if the overall user score drops below a 60% for Starfield, I think MS and Bethesda should walk away from this game too. At some point, it's just not worth it.
They are fucked anyway. Skyrim was launched in 2011. For PS3 and X360. We will get GTA 6 before Elder Scroll 6. When they decided to make Starfield and not Elder Scroll, they naturally made that game go one gen of consoles later. The tech to do that, and do that well, don't exist yet. If Starfield was the success they wanted it to be, then they would do what they did with Skyrim: endless reeditions and ports. As it sadly failed to have the same impact, they have to fix that first. But now they are under Xbox. And Xbox have more money, but different goals than Bethesda. They can't allow another Fallout 76 scenario to occur. So we are looking at what, a 2030 date for Skyrim sucessor? They will have to support Starfield for Gamepass. I am sure that Xbox will periodically take some of their best people to help other studios for games that need it, like ID helped them for the shooting, or Gears of War team helping others studios in handling Unreal Engine 5. If Xbox was ambitious, they would grow 2 teams, one doing Elder Scrolls, and one working from Starfield to accomplish their ambitions. There is great potential in it. But the risk would be to fail at both. And yes, nobody want to wait even more for the next Skyrim. But at this point it is inevitable.
Absolutely. At least they tried. Now if they stick with it and make it really work it will be even better.It sucks that the next Elder Scrolls is still years away. However, we get so many sequels and remasters/remakes these days that I appreciate a company risking millions trying something new.(even if this game is sadly disappointing in some aspects)
Granted, I certainly wouldn't mind an Oblivion remaster while waiting for the next Elder Scrolls.
Maybe it was those post on Steam and Twitter from Bethesda, saying the game was boring by design. And telling gamers they don't know how to make games.
People are getting fed up with all the lies and excuses from Bethesda.
Starfield is 63%, not 66% (though Forspoken is 60%).
Well at least it's getting some nice updates on the tech side early next year.
I don't do Gamepass so will wait for these updates and a super low price to finally give it a try.
Where can I find this post?Obligatory:
Merry Christmas everybody
The main issue with a lot of the criticism with Bethesda is basically hate bandwagon that has gotten into mainstream ever since that hbomberguy Fallout 3 video, creating a revisionism circlejerk that BGS never did a good game. Before that there was No Mutants Allowed making boycotts against Bethesda for being the developer for Fallout 3 back in 06-07, and RPGCodex having a beef with the studio since Oblivion. No shit that Fallout 3 has issues, but I lived those days and people did love Fallout 3 and it sold like hotcakes, who didn't want that Pipboy and lunchbox edition?Agreed. I give it 7/10. It does many things well. The unforgiveable thing that killed it from being good was the lack of exploration and the excitement of finding something and starting a quest that way. Even Fallout 4 had the magic of wandering into a new area, travelling off the beaten path and discovering new things. Starfield did have good gunplay, exciting faction quests with a ton of variety. Anyone who is a fan of Bethesda games should give it a try at least once. It's not an all time great and not the gamechanging exclusive Xbox needed, but it's not terrible.
From SteamDB. The Steam website/app only use reviews from people who purchased directly through Steam. Steam DB uses the reviews from people who also purchased the game on third-party key sites.I don't know where were sing those numbers.
They were 66% for Starfield and 63% for Forspoken.
I just checked again, and they both dropped one point.
Bro addicted to taking LsWhere can I find this post?
I did find this little gem.
Obligatory:
Merry Christmas everybody
The reviews we see on Steam are filtered by language. The reviews at Steamdb.info are global.I don't know where were sing those numbers.
They were 66% for Starfield and 63% for Forspoken.
I just checked again, and they both dropped one point.
What's a worse Christmas present, a lump of coal or a copy of StarfieldSanta Clause came to town. Looks like there was an influx of reviews on Christmas day.
Heads-up, don’t go in thinking it’s Skyrim in space, I did that and it gave a bad first impression.I still want to give it a whirl on PC(wasn't doing 30fps on XSX) under better circumstances.
The reviews we see on Steam are filtered by language. The reviews at Steamdb.info are global.
You can find the steamdb.info numbers at Steam too if you remove the language filter.
cc: Gaiff - the primary difference between the two platforms is the language filter - not just the source of purchase.
Remember when Bethesda screwed over Obsidian w.r.t to their bonus because the Metacritic score of New Vegas was off by one point or something?
WHO IS NOT GETTING ANY BONUS NOW, HUH?
Not sure why that's the case for you. But, as you can see in the two screenshots I shared above, if the reviews are filtered by language (English), we see only 89,094 reviews. If we remove that filter (and all other filters), we see the full total of 133,081 reviews - which also show a 63% rating.The score we see on Steamdb is adjusted by a custom formula.
On Steam they just divide the positive reviews by the total reviews to get the rating.
This is the formula that Steamdb uses
Introducing SteamDB's new rating algorithm
A short write-up on how the rating algorithm was made, and why it's probably a better estimate of the score.steamdb.info
My screenshots were taken with the Steam filters to include All languages, All purchase types, All languages, Lifetime date range, Playtime no minimum.
Meaning it shows every review. And it still shows me 95% Overall reviews for Starfield. And 62% for Forspoken.
Not sure why that's the case for you. But, as you can see in the two screenshots I shared above, if the reviews are filtered by language (English), we see only 89,094 reviews. If we remove that filter (and all other filters), we see the full total of 133,081 reviews - which also show a 63% rating.
133,081 reviews - which also show a 63% rating.
I still remember it nearly shut them down and they had to let go of people because of it.Remember when Bethesda screwed over Obsidian w.r.t to their bonus because the Metacritic score of New Vegas was off by one point or something?
WHO IS NOT GETTING ANY BONUS NOW, HUH?
Ah, so it gets better after 4 months then?I think those who still spend time hating on it after 4 months will come around eventually, there is definitely an interest otherwise they would just move on.
The game's on Gamepass no one is getting any bonuses lol.Remember when Bethesda screwed over Obsidian w.r.t to their bonus because the Metacritic score of New Vegas was off by one point or something?
WHO IS NOT GETTING ANY BONUS NOW, HUH?
Good. No one deserves any.The game's on Gamepass no one is getting any bonuses lol.
Not talking about playtime but those who keep talking about a game after 4 months they say they don’t find interesting. It’s like looking at a Steam review with 100+ hours logged and then a thumbs down. At some point those with no actual interest will turn around and walk away and I’m thinking that point comes slightly earlier lolAh, so it gets better after 4 months then?
I remember when RPGs would get good after the first 5/6h, in retrospective, those were the days
Sounds like a lot of ball washing of Bethesda going on... either that or gas lighting others
Writing looks to be atrocious as well though from examples I have seen. While previous games haven’t been a pinnacle of literature, at least it was tolerable before.Yeah, no amount of patching/mods can fix players biggest criticism: lack of exciting exploration and getting lost. It would have been much better off keeping it to several systems, with fleshed out worlds that were large enough to explore and get lost in. Any expansion should take place on a few planets with smaller quests and be like Far Harbor.
When you have expectations so ridiculously high that the game might be the ultimate cure to depression, that’s what happens. Mostly negative? C’mon.
That's on Bethesda and Todd Howard for building up those expectations while not allowing anyone to actually play the game prior to reviews.