Starfield

Great game if you like RPG type open world exploration.

The problem with the game, which if you are any kind of sci-fi fan is great at first meeting, is that the developers and producers were at war from the start. Fallout 4 was not Fallout 76 precisely because of it's characters that were very real and relatable. The world was handcrafted, the devastation told a story.It was empty but full of desolation, carnage, remnants of the old world, and surprises around every corner. Skyrim's ability to mod the game into any fantasy you could think of was defining and it is the most modded game of all time, and infinitely replayable for that reason. In Starfield, the producers went "Hey ya kno, Skyrim they made a lot of mods, lets do a sandbox like that, where its big but empty so they can mod everything - but get them to buy mods on Creations so they can make DLC for us and we get a piece of everything they make" And the developers went: "What about the potential to make really cool new ideas and questlines now that we have better graphics and engines then we ever had before?" Ecklund questline was born,Vae Victus, etc. "Yeah yeah, make like a few of those too. It'll be like a music album, a couple hits to make people happy, then the rest of the songs to fill it out." "- But what about" "Yeah yeah, fine, just, make some cool ones, procedurally generate everything and let them mod it and we get paid for it." And it turns out people aren't that dumb. People realized they killed and monetized modding on purpose for greed. Things that should have been in the game base, like certain joinable factions, were made pricey DLC on an already inflated pricetag for the base game, which effectively is a sandbox, waiting to be modded into a complete game, incentivizing everyone to buy mods that used to be free on certain sites with donations. With the modding community now divided, fewer modders mod the game, fewer people want to buy mods that used to be free on certain websites, and it makes the sandbox look all the more empty. Massive backfire. It doesn't have Fallout's characters, or world building. It doesn't have Skyrim's infinite mod customization. And when you realize this you get bored, knowing it's not going to change unless you open your wallet a little further each time for more content. You also feel bitter, knowing what could have been if they listened to the developers, and let them make a world worth modding, without trying to add price tags to even the mods. There are gems here and there. But far and too few between.

I might do a full review after playing the game more. I've heard so much bad about this game that I avoided it for 3 years. I figured it was time to try it out while it was on sale, and I didn't realize I needed this game so bad until now. While its definitely not everyone's cup of tea, I will say that if you have the spare funds, you should ignore the negative reviews and try this game out for yourself and make your own opinion on it.

200 hours in, 0% main story completed. Right after the intro, I walked away from the main mission and never looked back. The side content and universe details are so massive and engaging that I've been lost in space for 200 hours just living my own story. Forget the negative reviews; people forgot what a true Bethesda RPG feels like. Starfield is The Elder Scrolls formula perfected in a new universe.

Every game deservers their criticism, but does Starfield deserve it's hate? I bought this game only knowing its hated, its about space, and its made by Bethesda. On playing for myself, I just don't understand where the hate is coming from? The graphics are beautiful, the combat is addicting and the scope of actual content is mind boggling. Yeah you have bigger "scope" in starcitizen, but does that game have content? Story? Offline? A release date? Console support? Mod Support? Starfield basically has a space-sized sandbox to your RPG imagination's limits. I think that's the real problem with the ranty reviews. Rather than actually playing the game, people just stop to criticize the smallest and dumbest of things. Which again, when does it become criticism and when is it just hate and "I hate this game because it doesnt have this X thing I say it needs?" I respect the artists, the devs, everyone for THEIR game and effort. Lots have the wrong attitude with their choice of words. Starfield is a space game. Make your character, build your ship, go have fun and enjoy the quests and gameplay. Hate ratings prove the internet is full of bad influencers. Gaming is not suppose to be a hateful vent for your own problems. Its meant to enjoy.

Dope game, doesnt deserve the negativity it received on launch, and still has now. I never expected it to dethrone Elder Scrolls mainline games, but i still had alot of fun with it. The procedural gen needed more work, but the scale of the worlds can be really impressive. The improvements to the Creation Engine are massive, it is great to have the ability to both drag/drop AND also use the Decorate mode! The shipbuilding is amazing! Especially with some mods. I probably spent 1/4 of my total playtime in the ship builders. I also enjoyed the base building overall, it improved over Fallout 4 a few ways, but it wasnt an amazing or innovative system. I enjoyed it mostly building an aesthetically pleasing view overlooking alien trees, planet rings, etc. The combat is fairly basic, but I did have a blast with the slow-mo jetpack gunplay. That was really rewarding and fun. The melee was sadly quite unimproved from Fallout 4, so I didnt spend too much time with those builds. Some of the traditional Bethesda difficulty scaling (aka damage multipliers) was annoying, but there are plenty of skill points and when you max out the relevant damage perks it seemed to outscale the difficulty. Especially with Terran Armada guns. Speaking of - the DLCs I thought were much too short but at least they were well done. The environments in the first one and the weapons and zero G combat of the 2nd DLC were enjoyable enough. The MTX market to buy more DLC wasnt what a lot of people want, but I think it is good to offer mod authors a way to earn $ for their work. Unpopular opinion, I am sure. The in-world justification for the NG+ system is excellent, and it can provide a lot of replayability for some ppl, but others may feel like the losses isn't worth it. My only complaint here is the dragon shout upgrading is now locked behind entering NG+ at least once, so it can feel like your first playthrough is a waste of time/effort. The upgrades are 100% worth the time though!!

Honestly bro if people didn't compare this game to Skyrim and fallout they'd have an amazing time. If you think about this game as it's own thing it's crazy good but when you start saying "Oh it doesn't have this mechanic" or "I can't do this like in Skyrim" you're gonna feel some type of way. I like it though. I went through a phase when it first came out when I said it was amazing and then like 40 hours in I started to get bored. Now the Free lanes update is out and honestly that update with all the DLC makes this game awesome again. Definitely can feel boring at times but I feel that way with many open world games honestly.

I´ve played this game for more then a thousand hours. That should tell you alot. Is it a perfect game? No, but it´s still a good one

Starfield, Bethesda Summary: Quite literally the best “what it would actually be like to walk across an exomoon’s surface” simulator out there. And kind-of a lifelong dream title for me having been raised on [i]Elite[/i] and [i]Damocles[/i] in last century’s 8- and 16-bit eras. But, especially so in the first few tens of hours that I played, it’s just amazing at capturing what it would most likely feel like to yomp across an icy moon in close orbit around a ringed gas giant. It does, of course, then compromise this with things to make gameplay work, like sound in a vacuum, but I’ll never forget the first time I walked / jumped for what would have been kilometres over a ridged ice world watching as its ringed parent planet gradually set over the horizon. But … so many cons to go with the pros. And so many missed opportunities - although, given the ambition of the title, these are more forgivable. Pros: - A literally unimaginably enormous play area, although formally infinitesimal compared to [i]No Man’s Sky[/i] (but much more realistic than that title) - Incredibly diverse and beautifully realised planetary environments, especially so for those moons in orbit around ringed planets - Broadly imaginative flora and fauna populate many planets and moons, and the geological / resource side of things is handled fairly well - Enjoyably Fallout-like in its quests, side-quests and companion dynamics - An actually not-bad sci-fi tale hiding behind all of the plot machinations - much cleverer than most comparable titles - Solid FPS combat dynamics with a range of energy and ballistic weapons (but a little light compared to Fallout) Cons: - While enormous, the play area is mostly “empty” or occupied by copy-paste locations and the fraction that is procedurally-generated compared to designed is too large - Alien life is occasionally clearly templated on living or extinct Earth life - While satisfyingly challenging at first, combat becomes much easier after levelling-up - also, for all the talk of fragile spacesuits, damage is totally conventional - Completely unnecessary “special powers” that add too much fantasy and contribute very little to combat Space travel sections are actually pretty pointless, the balance of space combat is set too challenging by default, and ship-upgrading is made too non-intuitive to bother with - Unlike [i]Fallout 4[/i], building outposts is completely unnecessary (I never built a single one), entirely skipped by the narrative, and just weird in a game where there’s just so much to visit that returning to a planet never happens (except to advance the plot) - The Va’Ruun faction is just too peripheral in the base game Missed opportunities: - Strangely, the space flight parts of the game are mostly pointless, just affording you nice views of planets and occasional fights with bad guys; usually, you arrive in a planetary system, then immediately land on the planet or its moon, completely defeating the object of these bits (although I guess they look good in trailers, etc.) - The game doesn’t do anything with the outposts to make them essential to the plot or even gameplay, so the temptation (which I succumbed to) is to not bother with them at all; you literally don’t need them for anything - [i]Fallout 4[/i] at least fitted them into the plot and gameplay - While I guess they might be out there and I just didn’t find them, I felt that it was missing science / sci-fi Easter Eggs, especially in our familiar solar system (e.g. no Ceres / Eris, no floating defunct NASA probes, very limited locations on Earth, no Icehenge on Pluto, etc.) - Strange errors / omissions in the orbital dynamics of planets and moons; basically what the solar system map shows you of relative planet and moon orbital positions doesn’t align well with what you experience when you actually visit the moons; when you do finally work out which side of the moon is facing a planet, you can then use this information to get better views, but it’s needlessly messy - While there are zero-gee locations in the game, they’re quite rare, and it’s a loss to combat that they’re not more common, as they’re quite fun to navigate - While there are hints of it, the immersion of the game would be better if the distribution of humans and the different factions across the solar systems included was more systematic; i.e. lots close to Sol, fewer as you move outwards Overall: A definite thumbs-up, but probably only really for fans of either semi-realistic space walking simulators or RPG titles like Fallout. Lots to love, but lots to get very annoyed by.

This engine can't support what Starfield wants to be.