Support NeoGAF

[Matsuchezz]

After spending some time playing, this is clearly either a 6 or 7 out of 10 game. This shit is fucking dull, combat sucks, AI sucks, ship combat sucks, uninteresting companions, no interesting underlying systems with character builds, these "powers" are a joke lol. All you're doing in this game is walk to quest location do the thing and fast travel to another location with various load screens. There is literally no reason for the ship to exist in this game, it adds nothing but more load screens. The planets are barren with nothing interesting in it. This is clearly a walking simulator.

To those who are giving this game a 9 or 10. I'm convinced you just got low standards. If I fed you shit you'll just tell me its chocolate.

Amén to that!

 

[GymWolf]

Topher getting a taste of his own medicine lmao.

I had people telling me that i was coping for starfield

 

[JayDucker]

After spending some time playing, this is clearly either a 6 or 7 out of 10 game. This shit is fucking dull, combat sucks, AI sucks, ship combat sucks, uninteresting companions, no interesting underlying systems with character builds, these "powers" are a joke lol. All you're doing in this game is walk to quest location do the thing and fast travel to another location with various load screens. There is literally no reason for the ship to exist in this game, it adds nothing but more load screens. The planets are barren with nothing interesting in it. This is clearly a walking simulator.

To those who are giving this game a 9 or 10. I'm convinced you just got low standards. If I fed you shit you'll just tell me its chocolate.

 

[Topher]

Topher getting a taste of his own medicine lmao.

I'm too lazy to read the pages and all the back and forth, but someone called Topher an Xbox fanboy because he likes Starfield?

lol.

Hey Topher, dont you love it when youre on one side of the fence and rattled gamers on the other side are hunting for blood?

Several revelations about myself in this thread it would seem. lol...but the guy just made a mistake. all good

 

[Raven117]

Ya know.... This is a solid freaking game...but...man it just kinda lacks that certain special sauce that truly GOTGs have. Hard to put my finger on it.

 

[CloudShiner]

Smug Linneman on the latest DF Direct had to drop in (again) that he finally owns a decent PC, this time in reference to him not needing to buy the DLSS mod for the game 'because I have such a good GPU now that I don't need it'.

Seems to be a weekly occurrence now, but I politely suggest he should focus on getting rid of at least one of his three chins before feeling quite so smug with his newly learned PCMR comments.

 

[Rocco Schiavone]

 

[DeepEnigma]

Atrocious player physics.

And fuck R* for no RDR2 current gen update.

 

[GymWolf]

Kinda unfair, no game has euphoria engine other than rockstar game so no game is gonna get close to rdr2 body physics.

Majority of games look like starfield when you fall off a cliff except maybe last 2 zelda because they put a lof of focus on ragdoll unpredictability when enemies hits you.

they could have pointed out so many other bad animations tbh.

 

[Gudji]

Who the fuck wrote the main story for the game? Todd Howard himself?Holy fuck.

 

[GymWolf]

Who the fuck wrote the main story for the game? Todd Howard himself?Holy fuck.

I'm curious because half the people say it's bad, and the other half say it's kinda unpredictable.

 

[skit_data]

I'm curious because half the people say it's bad, and the other half say it's kinda unpredictable.

I mean, it could be unpredictable and bad.
Like that movie Signs or something.

 

[DeaDPo0L84]

If it werent for the graphics/animations, this game could have been launched before Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Skyrim

In many ways, its not only an stagnation of the formula, but a regression

"Know what would be fun? Dividing the map in 5 different planets that the player will have to fast travel in order to go to. Exploration? Fuck that" - Todd Howard

Imagine fast travelling from the Vault to the Capitol Building in F3, not experiencing all the side content in between.

Or going from Whiterun directly to the College of Winterhold

That's how I feel doing missions in Starfield. Going from point A to point B.

Unfortunately this is where I'm at after clocking in 50 hours. It's a big world but none of it is connected and so in the end it ends up feeling really small. I get Destiny 1 vibes from this game, a decent template for them to expand upon but nowhere near being some pinnacle of gaming or even something that will push the genre forward as a whole.

 

[GymWolf]

I mean, it could be unpredictable and bad.
Like that movie Signs or something.

Legit point, but since we saw so many different scifi material from serials to movies etc, just the fact that bethesda could write something that i don't expect, it would be a big plus for me.

(if the plot make sense and they connect all the dots)

 

[Hugare]

I'm curious because half the people say it's bad, and the other half say it's kinda unpredictable.

I haven't finished it yet, nowhere near it, but

Spoiler: BIG STORY SPOILERS

Spoiler: YOU'VE BEEN WARNED

You are literally called "Starborn". Yeah, Starborn. Like Dragonborn. And you are capable of using powers that are a lot like the shouts from Skyrim

 

[Thirty7ven]

He is criticizing Gamespot for publishing their review after "playing for only 55 hours."

The fuck are they supposed to do? The main story ends in 17 hours. They played for 55 hours -- 300% the time it takes to finish the main story.

Horrible.

You only need 40 hours to get a private pilot license, but apparently you gotta make Starfield your career and wait for retirement.

 

[GymWolf]

@Hungarian i'm not gonna click that dude, i think that i didn't even reached half point.

Spoiler

I still have to accompany the old rich dude to neon, for now i'm doing faction quests and powers temples discovery

 

[Thirty7ven]

I think the point @Mattyp is making is that there isn't enough time in the review cycle to cover the entirety of the game. To your point, I don't think they have to. I'd say there is probably enough in the main game loop to come to a decision as to the reviewers opinion on the game. I do think, however, that there is a hell of a lot left on the table there that the reviewer simply doesn't have enough time to get to. But in fairness to @Mattyp he acknowledges that even if they did that doesn't mean the score would change. In fact, he suggests it is possible the score might even go lower. But he is right that there is enormous pressure on reviewers to get the review done by the embargo date.

But this has been a point of debate for years. How much time does a reviewer need to spend in a game, especially one this size? From his standpoint, he put 70 hours in and didn't think that was enough for him to review. He said that before any other review scores came out so it isn't like this was only in reaction to scores from other outlets.

55 hours with a game, two weeks, almost 4K words to explain your review.

It’s hard to support that pov. On top of that the ign review comes from a fan of Bethesda’s previous games.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Kinda unfair, no game has euphoria engine other than rockstar game so no game is gonna get close to rdr2 body physics.

Majority of games look like starfield when you fall off a cliff except maybe last 2 zelda because they put a lof of focus on ragdoll unpredictability when enemies hits you.

they could have pointed out so many other bad animations tbh.

The easy ragebaits around Starfield are something else eh?

They could do these videos for 99% of games out there, but nothing gives the clicks like Starfield.

 

[Topher]

55 hours with a game, two weeks, almost 4K words to explain your review.

It’s hard to support that pov. On top of that the ign review comes from a fan of Bethesda’s previous games.

Yeah man, I get it. I also think that's enough time in a game for a review. Just think Matty was making some reasonable points as well.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Yeah man, I get it. I also think that's enough time in a game for a review. Just think Matty was making some reasonable points as well.

The only relevant point he’s making in my eyes is that if you like Starfield and buy into the world and it results in a high level of immersion, then you have a lot of content waiting for you.

I see people who really wanted to like the game and then they keep putting those hours until they love it.

Matty and Cog are effectively saying that Starfield is a victim of the review process, that somehow you had to build a new category of reviews just for Starfield.

Baldurs Gate 3 just released. People acting like Starfield is the only game stuffed with content in ages are missing me.

 

[Topher]

The only relevant point he’s making in my eyes is that if you like Starfield and buy into the world and it results in a high level of immersion, then you have a lot of content waiting for you.

I see people who really wanted to like the game and then they keep putting those hours until they love it.

Matty and Cog are effectively saying that Starfield is a victim of the review process, that somehow you had to build a new category of reviews just for Starfield.

Baldurs Gate 3 just released. People acting like Starfield is the only game stuffed with content in ages are missing me.

To be fair, I don't think he said Starfield is the victim. I recall him saying the reviewers are at the mercy of the reviews process and have a hard deadline to meet. He also says that could have been mitigated with Bethesda handing out review codes earlier than they did.

 

[Raven117]

If it werent for the graphics/animations, this game could have been launched before Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Skyrim

In many ways, its not only an stagnation of the formula, but a regression

"Know what would be fun? Dividing the map in 5 different planets that the player will have to fast travel in order to go to. Exploration? Fuck that" - Todd Howard

Imagine fast travelling from the Vault to the Capitol Building in F3, not experiencing all the side content in between.

Or going from Whiterun directly to the College of Winterhold

That's how I feel doing missions in Starfield. Going from point A to point B.

I made almost the same comment to some friends today.

The “magic” of Bethesda games comes in the wandering from point A to B and seeing what happens to you. To slowing immerse yourself in the world.

So far, starfield almost completely takes that sense away. All made worse through a very clunky UI

It’s baffling they chose to take this part out of a Bethesda game.

 

[Punished Miku]

I made almost the same comment to some friends today.

The “magic” of Bethesda games comes in the wandering from point A to B and seeing what happens to you. To slowing immerse yourself in the world.

So far, starfield almost completely takes that sense away. All made worse through a very clunky UI

It’s baffling they chose to take this part out of a Bethesda game.

I think they set out to make a hard sci-fi game, and then struggled to "find the fun" because there isn't really supposed to be anything fun about hard sci-fi, or being an astronaut. Like I said a couple weeks ago, if you're the type that wants to play a game similar to Interstellar then you may love this. In Interstellar they fly around space the entire movie to land on a water planet with nothing on it but 1 digital recorder. Then they fly to another barren rock planet with 1 tiny outpost, zero useful resources and 1 NPC who is crazy and tries to steal your shit.

I think they approached this with the ambition of creating the best full galaxy they could, and simulating the kind of "non-fun" hard sci-fi like 2001 Space Odyssey, Interstellar, Gravity, and others that are purposely dry, sterile, bland to many people. Then as game designers, they tried to build in as many fun gameplay loops as they could while fitting within the confines of a semi-realistic universe.

If playing a hard sci-fi roleplaying game is your thing, you just might love it. Many gamers probably don't even like hard sci-fi movies, let alone a gigantic RPG 50-100x that long. No one in Interstellar is exploring things like they do in Skyrim on foot, and that's just not what they were primarily trying to achieve.

And then when you're in the cities, it's pretty much the same type of gameplay and quests as any other Bethesda game, but personally I find a lot of them much better.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

I know this is a reader’s review but I can guarantee they laughed as they published this. Did Xbox really think they could try and fuck with UK reviewers and then those same reviewers wouldn’t pick the game apart once they could?

To be fair, I don't think I've seen a Reader's feature by them that hasn't been slating Xbox so I think it likely made no difference.

 

[Punished Miku]

To be fair, I don't think I've seen a Reader's feature by them that hasn't been slating Xbox so I think it likely made no difference.

I guess he's insinuating that UK reviewers are lying and exaggerating the low scores as just payback for not getting a free, early copy of the game? That would be hard to believe, and doesn't really seem like anything to brag about. People just say whatever they can to get a win, even if doesn't make sense.

 

[Raven117]

I think they set out to make a hard sci-fi game, and then struggled to "find the fun" because there isn't really supposed to be anything fun about hard sci-fi, or being an astronaut. Like I said a couple weeks ago, if you're the type that wants to play a game similar to Interstellar then you may love this. In Interstellar they fly around space the entire movie to land on a water planet with nothing on it but 1 digital recorder. Then they fly to another barren rock planet with 1 tiny outpost, zero useful resources and 1 NPC who is crazy and tries to steal your shit.

I think they approached this with the ambition of creating the best full galaxy they could, and simulating the kind of "non-fun" hard sci-fi like 2001 Space Odyssey, Interstellar, Gravity, and others that are purposely dry, sterile, bland to many people. Then as game designers, they tried to build in as many fun gameplay loops as they could while fitting within the confines of a semi-realistic universe.

If playing a hard sci-fi roleplaying game is your thing, you just might love it. Many gamers probably don't even like hard sci-fi movies, let alone a gigantic RPG 50-100x that long. No one in Interstellar is exploring things like they do in Skyrim on foot, and that's just not what they were primarily trying to achieve.

And then when you're in the cities, it's pretty much the same type of gameplay and quests as any other Bethesda game, but personally I find a lot of them much better.

As good as explanation as any.

The thing is...the way its put together, it doesn't nail that hard sci-fi sense of loneliness either (no man's sky did it way better, as does Elite Dangerous).

I think you nailed it. They had trouble finding the fun.

There is just so much that takes you out of the illusion.

 

[Gudji]

Savage.

 

[ByWatterson]

Not sure if anyone already posted this, but this comparison between the marketing and reality is brutal (he likes much of the game, though).

 

[feynoob]

 

[ByWatterson]

Indictment right here, we got mr brand ambassador talking about “we” being up against a “rigged game”.

The script has been delivered. It’s us vs them, they are out there to get X nation brehs

Hilarious, listen to Cog though he’s not a shill trust, listen to this fanboy going after a reviewer while pretending he’s not. The People, listen to the people.

God just the most embarrassing fuckos.

Embarrassing conversation.

The 7/10s didn't have enough time. The 10/10s did I'm sure.

Like Jesus CHRIST these guys shouldn't be on LSM.

 

[feynoob]

Embarrassing conversation.

The 7/10s didn't have enough time. The 10/10s did I'm sure.

Like Jesus CHRIST these guys shouldn't be on LSM.

The embarasement part is the game needing more hours to flesh out.
People value their time, there is no way they will waste them on a game that takes longer to flesh out.

 

[Clintizzle]

Just saw a few reviews on YouTube instead of reading this thread and I have to say there is a weird vibe in the videos. It's the same vibe English teachers in my high school gave when they talked about a poem or a book. Overanalyzing things and going way too deep into things that don't deserve it.

"I just don't feel connected to these planets" "The story didn't keep me awake at night contemplating why she never texted me back" "The game didn't help me find my sexuality and raised an important question, am I a tits or an ass guy?"

People just need to chill and give it a go and if you find yourself wanting to keep playing, great. If not? Also great. Hotel? Trivago.

 

[JTCx]

That gif accurately encapsulates your typical starfield enjoyer.

 

[bender]

Kinda unfair, no game has euphoria engine other than rockstar game so no game is gonna get close to rdr2 body physics.

If physics were a 400m race, R* might be leading the pack but that doesn't excuse Bethesda oversleeping for a rousing game of cornhole. Don't even get me started on animations. BGS feels a decade+ behind industry standards.

 

[GymWolf]

If physics were a 400m race, R* might be leading the pack but that doesn't excuse Bethesda oversleeping for a rousing game of cornhole. Don't even get me started on animations. BGS feels a decade+ behind industry standards.

Oh i know that, it just feels unfair to compare falling animations since every game fail that test as bad as bethesda.

 

[jm89]

Metro UK 6/10

Starfield review - the final verdict: outdated, unambitious and disjointed

GameCentral completes its review of Bethesda’s new sci-fi epic and explores why Starfield fails to live up to its full potential.

metro.co.uk

 

[Sybrix]

I am loving this game now, but it takes 10 hours of playtime at least to fully understand how to play it. And that aint a good thing.

 

[bender]

Oh i know that, it just feels unfair to compare falling animations since every game fail that test as bad as bethesda.

Disagreed. Just look at the run animation in Starfield. There are PS2 games with much better animations. It really feels like the only focus BGS has is making bigger and bigger game worlds and adding on build-like functionality (bases, ships). Everything else they do feels incredibly dated.

 

[Banjo64]

I guess he's insinuating that UK reviewers are lying and exaggerating the low scores as just payback for not getting a free, early copy of the game? That would be hard to believe, and doesn't really seem like anything to brag about.

I’m not bragging about it. I’m stating that it’s human nature to get protective and reactionary when your livelihood is compromised.

Unless you think Metro’s final 6/10 is a fair one? (I don’t).

People just say whatever they can to get a win, even if doesn't make sense.

You’ve lost me completely.

 

[NEbeast]

 

[BbMajor7th]

Comes back to the biggest sin committed by Bethesda in developing this game: sticking with this old ass engine. I'm at nearly 100 hours and the game is a solid 9 to me ("low standards" be damned), but I'm dinging the game mostly for Bethesda's stubbornness here. They took the easy route and tried to refit their old engine. Obviously they hit a wall and came to the point where the changes required needed for this engine to be the equivalent of modern engines was nearly as big a task as creating an entirely new one. I don't know that, but makes sense to me. Beyond that the sheer amount of content in this game is absolutely what one would expect from Bethesda and that makes up a lot of ground lost, imo.

An oft-overlooked fact in the No Man's Sky redemption story is the fact that Sean Murray is an engine developer by trade - he built the Skyscraper Engine that powers NMS specifically for the game he had in mind. I'd imagine that fact alone is what makes so much of No Man's Sky possible and why it's seen such a huge uptick in visuals, performance and features over the years, whilst targeting less powerful hardware like the Switch.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Metro UK 6/10

Starfield review - the final verdict: outdated, unambitious and disjointed

GameCentral completes its review of Bethesda’s new sci-fi epic and explores why Starfield fails to live up to its full potential.

metro.co.uk

Will have to see if this is applied to Xbox on MC and whether this drops it to an 84.

 

[laynelane]

Several revelations about myself in this thread it would seem. lol...but the guy just made a mistake. all good

I still remember someone calling you a Sony fanboy and using your bunny avatar at the time as proof. It was pretty funny lol.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Very well-made video, addressing numerous things and objections against common complaints.

 

[Madserb2023]

I think there is in fairness a problem with the current review cycle in regards to trying to get through a game as quickly as possible to get the review out in time for the clicks. This has very likely lead to games being quite front loaded these days with bombastic set pieces early on to then for the pace to slowly die. Starfield is this in reverse and it does absolutely get better. The best parts of the game involve factions and late game mechanics that many reviewers by their own admission did not touch before their review. However, if a game does take a ridiculous number of hours to get going then that is a fault in its design.
Ragnorok is this. The game feels like a downgrade at the beginning with a terrible walking section that probably ended most people's session. However there is an area you unlock later that almost feels like a different game and it's amazing. Starfield is a bit like this but even more stark.

 

[Crispy Gamer]

Bro he was getting on my nerves the way he was hyping up Starfield he's my goto for Destiny content

 

[GHG]

I think there is in fairness a problem with the current review cycle in regards to trying to get through a game as quickly as possible to get the review out in time for the clicks. This has very likely lead to games being quite front loaded these days with bombastic set pieces early on to then for the pace to slowly die. Starfield is this in reverse and it does absolutely get better. The best parts of the game involve factions and late game mechanics that many reviewers by their own admission did not touch before their review. However, if a game does take a ridiculous number of hours to get going then that is a fault in its design.
Ragnorok is this. The game feels like a downgrade at the beginning with a terrible walking section that probably ended most people's session. However there is an area you unlock later that almost feels like a different game and it's amazing. Starfield is a bit like this but even more stark.

What the hell are you talking about? It's not "the reverse" anything. If anything the formula is more like marmite.

The late reviews (and the reviews which were not pressured by a review embargo) are pretty much universally mixed/negative.

How many times do you propose someone needs to complete this game before they are qualified to give their review and opinion on it?

 

[Hugare]

Metro UK 6/10

Starfield review - the final verdict: outdated, unambitious and disjointed

GameCentral completes its review of Bethesda’s new sci-fi epic and explores why Starfield fails to live up to its full potential.

metro.co.uk

"While it’s not unheard of to be reviewing a game well after it first came out, it is unusual to be doing so after other outlets have already rendered their verdict. Thanks to Bethesda’s refusal to send review copies to multiple UK websites, seemingly in an attempt to manipulate the Metacritic score prior to launch, we’ve been playing catch-up. We’ve avoided reading any reviews, but we have seen the general reaction, which is understandably mixed."

Ohhh, they went there

"Starfield is so undercooked it’s probably a danger to pregnant women."

 

[NEbeast]

Bro he was getting on my nerves the way he was hyping up Starfield he's my goto for Destiny content

Sadly, it seems he fell into the trap most people did. Still, he isn't a console fanboy so his review is fair. His main game is D2 and he is fine calling Bungie out on their bullshit.