• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Starfield | Review Thread

What scores do you think StarfieId will get?

  • 40-45%

    Votes: 3 0.5%
  • 45-50%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 50-55%

    Votes: 1 0.2%
  • 55-60%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 60-65%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 65-70%

    Votes: 2 0.3%
  • 70-75%

    Votes: 5 0.8%
  • 75-80%

    Votes: 15 2.3%
  • 80-85%

    Votes: 81 12.5%
  • 85-90%

    Votes: 241 37.3%
  • 90-95%

    Votes: 243 37.6%
  • 95-100%

    Votes: 55 8.5%

  • Total voters
    646
  • Poll closed .

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
This is going to be one of those review threads where the game is considered overhyped shit if it doesn't get 90+, isn't it?

Kill Me Smh GIF

How'd you know this was going to happen?
 

Bigfroth

Member
I just watched DF's breakdown on the consoles I'm relieved lol Series S is a surprise. I'm going in deep tonight on the S can't wait.
 

Lokaum D+

Member
But reviews are completely subjective. Once upon a time in hollywood got great reviews, its one of the biggest pieces of shit movies i have ever seen. Its all up to the individual. People really need to understand that.
yeah i know, but fan base isnt subjective, some % of Xbox fans was expecting this to review way better after Redfalls fiasco, 86 is far from a bad game and i ll play this game on sep 6, but after all the hype that Starfield Direct brought i dont no if 86 ll cut it for some ppl.
 

Thirty7ven

Banned
Same, we could've got 20 or so good planets for a more focused experience, instead we probably got like

200 rock planets
200 gas planets
300 planets with random outposts or animals
300 fire/water/ice/inhabitable planets


Most of the planets seem to be for mining or resource gathering with a few dungeons spread out in some.

At most they should’ve went with a star system like ours and that’s it.

Anybody surprised the game is filled with a bunch of nothing was drinking the kool aid.
 

Trippy

Member
CSSZbAu.jpg


This is a criticism by IGN, and it’s purely POV, but this is exactly what I want from a game focusing on exploration. I don’t want to follow map markers and way points on a map screen. Following in game signs and directions from speaking to NPCs is exactly how I want to go about finding areas of interest. That’s what I consider immersive.
 

Montauk

Member
Meristation, biggest spanish videogame website gave Starfield a 5.8 in the review xD


I have no evidence but I’m gonna say that they were paid off.

Is that how it works? I just make a claim and that’s it? It’s so easy.
 

RoboFu

One of the green rats
I cannot tell who is joking and who is being serious anymore in this thread. lol It's hard to keep up and work.
 

amigastar

Member
87 is not a bad score but i expected better. I want games to be as good as possible so i feel a little bit sorry for Todd and the Bethesda Team.
 

iorek21

Member
This pretty much describes my entire fear of the game every since announced. I will never understand peoples obssesion like Ubisoft games with MORE BIGGER OPEN WORLD/MORE PLANETS. Fucking stupid. I'd rather explore 1 amazingly detailed planet than 1000 shallow ones.

Funny thing is that Ubisoft is promising a very authentic and hand-crafted collection of planets for Star Wars Outlaws.
 
Last edited:

mortal

Banned
Hype is a double-edged blade.

The average is a great score, but the way some people react to you'd think it averaged in the 70s or something.
A game can score very well, better than most even, and some people will still be disappointed.
Why even bother caring about the review score at that point if you're treating an average in the 80s or a 90 like a failure?
 

bender

What time is it?
Same, we could've got 20 or so good planets for a more focused experience, instead we probably got like

200 rock planets
200 gas planets
300 planets with random outposts or animals
300 fire/water/ice/inhabitable planets


Most of the planets seem to be for mining or resource gathering with a few dungeons spread out in some.

Focused experiences really aren't the bread and butter of BGS though.

"Starting gun"
runsport-borat.gif
 

twilo99

Gold Member
Hype is a double-edged blade.

The average is a great score, but the way some people react to you'd think it averaged in the 70s or something.
A game can score very well, better than most even, and some people will still be disappointed.
Why even bother caring about the review score at that point if you're treating an average in the 80s or a 90 like a failure?

I think you underestimate how emotionally charged everything around this game really is because it is not on PlayStation...
 
Last edited:

DragoonKain

Neighbours from Hell
Baldino:

Game takes a while to get going.
Has bugs as to be expected.
Main quest where he enjoyed the game most.
Gun play feels good.
Ship building works great, loved spending time with it.
Exploration wasn't as good as hoped. Very menu-y, loading screens, feels like there's too many barriers and doesn't feel seamless.
Many planets were bland and boring. Most planet dungeons didn't feel worth exploring.
 

GHG

Gold Member


"a bigger version of the outer worlds".

"Starfield is not about exploring space freely as a space pirate or a mercenary, it's about fast travelling to locations and having conversations with people"

Here's where I'm at with this - that's the kind of information they needed to tell us before we got to this stage. It's now clear this isn't a game focused on the exploration side of space, but why was so much of the pre-release marketing focused on that side of things? You're fast travelling from location to location, loading screen to loading screen, it's not seemless in any way and they knew this.

A better version of the outer worlds sounds more than good enough to me. So why not just be honest?
 
Top Bottom