• 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.

The hype around Starfield is massive, and growing.

FoxMcChief

FoxMcChief

Gold Member
MMaRsu said:
game will be so big

For perspective, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim had 60,000 lines, and Fallout 4 had around 111,000 lines—but some 70,000 of those were the player character's voice. Starfield's 250,000+ lines is all NPCs; a huge number, in contrast.
Click to expand...
mother of god danger GIF
 
MMaRsu

MMaRsu

Member
Agent_Nobody said:
Might be right about the words.

It’s a weird benchmark to be sure, a line can be a single word like: “Sure!”, or an entire monologue like that priest everyone hates from Skyrim does.
Click to expand...
Yeah and I dont know if this contains for instance 20.000 voicelines of the robot saying a certain name :p. But still impressive
 
Agent_Nobody

Agent_Nobody

Member
MMaRsu said:
Yeah and I dont know if this contains for instance 20.000 voicelines of the robot saying a certain name :p. But still impressive
Click to expand...
adamsapple said:
They're also expanding the names your companions will be able to say, like how Codsworth in Fallout 4 could call you a name from a long list.

Would love to see their repository of ethnic sounding names lol
Click to expand...
Shouldn’t count for lines since it’s just the one word replaced in the line. Especially with the robot where it’s monotone and they can generate thousands of them pretty quickly just through phonetics, similar to modern voice simulators.

Todd gave a damn specific number in that interview of 252,953 lines and I suspect he’s counting the number of lines done off the dialogue script that they voice recorded.
 
Last edited:
In Cold Blood

In Cold Blood

Banned
sainraja said:
I get what he is saying, and I even addressed it again in a later post, but also in the post you are quoting. However, the game would still exist + one more platform to its list.

Now, how Bethesda would have handled it on their own is anyone's guess—and—yes, it makes sense to me that Todd would acknowledge the benefits his game got due to extra time and resources; why wouldn't that help? But that does beg the question, why wouldn't he make the same decision?

I thought the point was, of the conversation that was happening, is how little influence MS had over shaping the game itself—they provided more time and resources, which I don't think was being contested anyway. In the end, it matters little, given the publisher is now owned by MS, so don't make the mistake of thinking I don't understand.

To put it simply, the game does not exist because of Microsoft/Xbox and as of right now, the game will help MS/Xbox more so, in how it shapes its future which I don't think is a bad thing.
Click to expand...
No, the game had been in development for many years prior to the aquisition, and im sure MS couldn't offer any advice to Todd on how to make a good game. What they could do however, is send the Advanced Technology Group over to Bethesda to help them with the game development, from a hardware perspective.

Zenimax was strapped for cash, which is firstly why they were looking to be bought out, and why they were selling games to Sony for exclusivity. It's why Redfall was such a clusterfuck. Zenimax pushed all their studios to jump on the GAAS game trend, hence FO76, ESO etc.
Redfall was initially meant to be a GAAS game, which is why they used Unreal Engine instead of their own one, and a decision was made half way through its development to try and save the game by turning it into a single player one.

Bethesda and Starfield was going to be the cash cow for Zenimax, so they would have wanted that game out the door as soon as it could. We saw that with 76.
In no world was Zenimax doing what Microsoft did.

On top of that, the decision to make it exclusive to Xbox helped with development, as it meant they didn't have to spend time and money porting it to PS5 as well.
 
Last edited:
sainraja

sainraja

Member
In Cold Blood said:
No, the game had been in development for many years prior to the aquisition, and im sure MS couldn't offer any advice to Todd on how to make a good game. What they could do however, is send the Advanced Technology Group over to Bethesda to help them with the game development, from a hardware perspective.

Zenimax was strapped for cash, which is firstly why they were looking to be bought out, and why they were selling games to Sony for exclusivity. It's why Redfall was such a clusterfuck. Zenimax pushed all their studios to jump on the GAAS game trend, hence FO76, ESO etc.
Redfall was initially meant to be a GAAS game, which is why they used Unreal Engine instead of their own one, and a decision was made half way through its development to try and save the game by turning it into a single player one.

Bethesda and Starfield was going to be the cash cow for Zenimax, so they would have wanted that game out the door as soon as it could. We saw that with 76.
In no world was Zenimax doing what Microsoft did.

On top of that, the decision to make it exclusive to Xbox helped with development, as it meant they didn't have to spend time and money porting it to PS5 as well.
Click to expand...
It is all a moot point right now but I don't think the money and time MS is putting forward was being contested. That much is clear, given that they bought the entire publisher. I thought it was a matter of green lighting the project, influencing it, etc. If that wasn't it, then I will gladly bow out of this conversation.
 
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Robbinhood said:
I was more asking for me, I'm debating playing this on GP or buying on Steam. I have steam bucks but I also have 4 months of GP codes.
Click to expand...

You might be able to beat it on game pass with those codes but no idea when the story DLC starts releasing.
 
MidGenRefresh

MidGenRefresh

*Refreshes biennially
Darkmakaimura said:



Yup, sounds like a Bethesda game.
Click to expand...


The exact quote would be “a little stiff and bland”, but I guess it wouldn’t generate enough clicks. We all know that NPC are a little stiff, it’s not a secret to anyone who watched the 40min Direct.

there's a quick shootout with pirates, which looks to control similarly to most other first-person shooters
Click to expand...

In all, Starfield looks very much like a Bethesda game. The environments are incredibly detailed - especially the interior of the player's ship - while human characters are a little stiff and bland.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Thirty7ven

Thirty7ven

Banned
NPCs look awful, which will bring down immersion a bit considering you will spend a lot of time talking to faces with poor models and dated animation. Should be ok when you are deep into it though.
 
Last edited:
Ginzeen

Ginzeen

Banned
Can't wait for this game. Feels like I've been waiting forever. Was going to do a second playthrough of BG3 to tide me over, a evil run, but they need to fix some things up before I do another playthrough. too much missing content.
 
MidGenRefresh

MidGenRefresh

*Refreshes biennially
Ginzeen said:
Can't wait for this game. Feels like I've been waiting forever. Was going to do a second playthrough of BG3 to tide me over, a evil run, but they need to fix some things up before I do another playthrough. too much missing content.
Click to expand...

Same. I actually dropped BG3 after just over 11 hours because I knew I wouldn't finish it before Starfield. Just over a week left to go!

BothPracticalJavalina-size_restricted.gif
 
b0uncyfr0

b0uncyfr0

Member
Im still not sold on planet exploring. These auto generated map stitches (or whatever they are) have to be really diverse.

If im seeing the exact same thing at every 3-4 POI, it'll kill exploration for me.
 
Last edited:
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
b0uncyfr0 said:
Im still not sold on planet exploring. These auto generated map stiches (or whatever they are) have to be really diverse.

If im seeing the exact same thing at every 3-4 POI, it'll kill exploration for me.
Click to expand...


I don't think it'll be like that. This is the best explanation I can find of how the worlds are generated with a combination of hand-crafted elements and procedural ones to make every players run a bit unique to each other.


As explained in the direct by Starfield's lead technical producer, Jean-Francois Levesque, the game's system "builds the planet as the player approaches it." The game seemingly specks the planet with different types of "hand-crafted content," and it does so randomly and dynamically, so while you may find a questline in one planet, a friend of yours may find it in another.


When it comes to what type of content the planets will have, the direct mentioned different resources for players to gather, outposts, plants, and creatures, both peaceful and hostile. As previously mentioned, the procedural generation will also include questlines, meaning some side quests will be in different places in the world map per save file.


There will, of course, be some static planets that presumably don't change as they're particularly relevant to the story, or they've simply been purposefully hand-crafted in their entirety. A few of these were mentioned in the direct, such as Alpha Centauri, the hub of Starfield's central civilized faction (the UC), Mars, which houses the UC's largest mining facility, and Volii, home of Neon, the pleasure city, among many others.
Click to expand...

www.dualshockers.com

Starfield's Thousand Planets Will Be Different For Every Player

Starfield's procedural generation with their thousand planets will happen on the fly, meaning planets will be different per every save file.
www.dualshockers.com www.dualshockers.com
 
Doctor Hades

Doctor Hades

Member
I am really looking forward to it and have the early access version pre-ordered for PC which means I can play it next Friday, 1st September.

However, I am not feeling the hype for this game... yet... mostly because I am busy playing through the wonderful Baldur's Gate 3 on PC, which is a very nice distraction, but also because I have been intentionally avoiding reading or watching anything related to Starfield bar this thread of course (which I am not reading through, only posting to!).

The problem with hyping up a game is that inevitably it just leads to disappointment when it doesn't meet expectations. I am quietly confident that this will be at least a very good game based on Oblivion, Skyrim and Fallout 4, games I loved and played for hundreds of hours. I am also hoping that this is coming from a very different Bethesda under Microsoft, one that has taken extra care to ensure a bug-free and polished experience at release, as well as extensive post-launch support, something that Bethesda were notoriously bad at previously. I want to play this game without any spoilers or preconceptions if I can. I may even avoid reading early reviews, if there are even any out on 1st September.
 
adamsapple

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?




fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuudge !

Prepare for lots of open spoilers on social media.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The hype around Hellblade II is massive, and growing.
Hype 7 8 9 10 11
510
33K
DeepEnigma replied
The hype around Shadow of the Erdtree is massive and growing (The Journey So Far video released)
20
1K
Pimpollo818 replied
Bethesda lead designer says Starfield is "hardest thing Bethesda has ever done" and the best game they ever made
Game Dev 2 3 4
193
10K
Barakov replied
  • Locked
The hype around Armored Core VI is massive, and growing.
39
3K
GC_DALBEN replied
  • Locked
The hype around Waifu Fighter is massive, and growing.
Event Hype
19
3K
SJRB replied
Top Bottom