Imagine if they made one system with 10 planets, with ground vehicles, gameplay-based and in-atmosphere flight, and total planet exploration with no invisible walls.
The ship builder has no business being so good when 99% of your experience with your ship will be a glorified cinematic fast travel loading screen cutscenes
i hate the argument that "modders can fix what's wrong with the game" because it removes the responsibility of creating a quality product from the actual, main developers and thrusts it upon people who aren't being paid to make mods and are making these mods out if passion.
It's even happening in esports. They've just released another last gen NBA 2K game for PC & modders are working to make the graphics reflect the current gen. This is the 4th game now using dated everything (a repackaged 2K20)
Any time I hear that a game gets good after X amount of hours, it feels like the game is telling me that if I don’t enjoy it at its worst I don’t deserve it at its best.
nah, if im paying $70 dollars for a game, the game NEEDS to have a general consensus that the game is good. End of story. don't play dice with my $70-$100 :D@@sxazon8360
It reminds me of a quote from Yahtzee Croshaw on his Zero Punctuation review of Final Fantasy XIII. "Some people have told me that FF13 gets good about 20 hours in. You know that's not really a point in its favor, right? Put your hand on a stove for 20 hours and yeah, you'll probably stop feeling the pain, but you'll have done serious damage to yourself."
I think my favorite thing about the Starfield cope is when people bring up how many loading screens you need to sit through, the main thing they say is "Well would you wanna sit and travel through empty space for 7 hours???" Like No Mans Sky...an indie game, has figured out how to do just that thing and it not take 7 hours, and its entertaining. So tired of the abused spouse syndrome Bethesda fans have adopted.
Let's see, sit through a 3 second loading screen so you can go to a planet with hundreds of NPCs, dozens of quests, thousands of interactable objects... Or sit through a ten second loading screen in no man's sky disguised as a planet fall animation... So you can visit a planet with maybe 2 dozen NPC's, no quests, no interactable objects, no dialogue options and a handful of cut and paste structures with nothing to do in them, hmm, which one should I choose?
@@timothyarnold1679 its almost like one had an infinitely larger budget to work with and still released the game with the full intention of letting the modding community complete it for them. cope as hard as youd like Starfield is a subpar game lacking features games way under their budget have been able to complete.
@@joetatos8687 No, actually it's almost like angry playstation fan boys are bombing the reviews on this game because they're crying in their pillows that they can't play It. I effectively pointed out how your argument was dogshit and you can't, to borrow a phrase from you "cope with it".
Yea, it feels like way too much padding. Flesh out 100 planets are so REALLY well instead of inundating with the same copy/past nonsense. And don't get me started on the found locations. They're exact copies of one another. "Oh- another crashed starship. I wonder what this will reveal." "Oh hey, this frozen-over underground lab looks AWFULLY familiar."
@@chriswhite3692 No man's sky kind of does the same. Massive planets full of thousands of the same dozen or so structures. I don't think art teams can put together 1000 New-Atlantis like cities in any reasonable length of time. Maybe in future procedural generation will get some more research in this direction, it should be possible.
Yeah - exactly the same thing happened to me playing D4. I fell asleep many times during the campaign and I played WoW and grinded that game for well over 15 years. People be coping hard.
Based off literally everything he’s saying. He didn’t past 6 hours in. And there was only 1 article saying you need to be 12 hours in before you have fun. That’s like saying World of Warcraft doesn’t get fun til 100 hours in. If you’re not having fun and don’t like open world games with story then don’t play it. I don’t mind a reviews on Starfield but he really shouldt be saying all this with less than 10 hours in a game that’s suppose to be 200 hours
@@GaryGlass1it's called bandwagoning. It's a hot topic right now so everyone is giving their very little experienced take on things that require hours to digest. It's fine. Just keep enjoying the game. People want too much new and don't appreciate the good stuff we have but then want the old ways and it goes on and on..
OSRS we like it out of Stockholm at this point, the late game is one of the worst exp grinds in any game to ever exist, it was designed in a way they thought no one would ever get a 99. They just underestimated how we get stuck into these loops.
I've played about 400-500 hours of Fallout 4, and although more than half of that was spent making Settlements I did get incredibly tuned to the cogs and wheels behind the game. When I began playing Starfield I immediately noticed I was playing FO4 with a space skin. Then I was introduced to that drug and found it to be Jet. Then I found a legendary weapon and realized the effects and even the effect's /names/ are exactly the same.
I dont think its like FO4 at all. In Fallout 4 there were so many interesting quests and locations. You can really just take of in any direction to encounter something interesting. My Starfield experience has been very bland as of now.
@@peterschmidt4212 sure, i also consider f4 superior game... the thing is that Starfield didnt improve anything to match or surpass other open world RPGs which were released in last 8 years. Yea there are some improvements here and there but a lot of games in last 8 years set the bar high and Starfield is not even close to consider it for wasting 100 hours there.
I really want to see them make an incredibly condensed world, developers keep going bigger and bigger but all we actually want is something kinda big bit incredibly dense
The rise of "open world" games saw great success over a decade ago and produced some incredible games. Maybe it's not your cup of tea but take Morrowind or Oblivion for example. But now we're beating a dead horse. Same thing with the whole superhero movie thing and the "Marvel Cinematic Universe", or other things like that. The reason why the relevant industry keeps spewing out complete bullshit is because they are trying to extract the most amount of profit by endlessly repeating the same "creative" formula, which by the definition of creativity is basically a snake eating it's own tail.
I'm a fan of games that are largely linear but just give you enough choice and variety here and there to not feel like you're on rails. I just really don't have the time for massive sandbox titles anymore.
@@sattlermusic2402comparing a "learning curve" to a games ability to be captivating is about the most retarded case of copium ive ever seen. Holy crap, give this shillout fanboy a gold medal 👏
ironically, i fucking HATE the ladders especially on the ship. i refuse to use them, 3 levels is a ship redesign for me, and 2 levels i just jump pack.
I remember one RUclipsr just called it a "Beam me up Scotty" game when he described Space Travel because of the Loading Screens. You just don't do it anymore unless mission calls for it. Also one of the funniest thing I heard screamed by a streamer was "I know this is an RPG game but, I didn't want to Roleplay as a Victim" when it came to Space Battles.
thing is, NO bethesda game requires 12 hours to get good, this far. Some even criticized Skyrim for having a very long intro, and that's barely an hour long.
But many times those experiences that only get good after 12 hours stick with you more than the 12 hours long good games. Akin to how many hate Dark Souls at first but end getting used to it and it becomes one of their favorite games... As much as I love indies, I don't really remember many of em long I play them.
@Osama-KIN_TMZ01 the Darksouls comment is 100% accurate. My thing is, I've gotten enjoyment from sandbox indie games (zomboid using it as the example since I've just recently started playing again) for hours more than the generic releases. I haven't touched a Bethesda game since playing skyrim a few months ago. I hated FO4, and the constant skyrim rereleases are stupid af. Bethesda lost all my respect when 76 came out. Play something worth while and not 60$ of recycled garbage to just hit the nostalgia factor.
I was really hoping that Starfield would take a page out of Cyberpunks book and make the interactions with characters more conversational and intimate rather than every character giving me the "You got games on your phone" stare.
@@Agent_3141YES. It was a dumpster fire on release, but now it's a very good game. I sank about 170h in 3 playthroughs. I played without QoL mods, so it could be even better (To be clear, I bought the game this July, not on release)
@@Agent_3141yes they are about to drop their dlc adding a bunch of content that was missing. Most bugs not all "MOST" are gone if you want to experience a great story and characters I'd pick it up with the dlc
@@Agent_3141wait until you can get the game with its newest DLC at a rebate. It's a good game overall but lacked certain elements that are coming soon with the same patch that comes the day of the DLC's release.
This "It's good! After 10+ hours or 10+ episodes it gets good!" argument has always amused me a bit. Maybe it's a variation of a sunk cost fallacy? I don't know. But if a large part of the work is bad, then the whole cannot be very great either.
@@brianmattei7134I mean not every game can be good at all parts and some flop the intro.Spider-man for example is panned for having stealth section but I liked them.Different strokes for different folks I guess and it's good to have variable gameplay but in starfield's case,it's just sunk cost.
Easy to iron out bugs when you've notably reduced what can happen in your engine. Simply don't let people do things besides select a handful of dialogue options or shoot things, and you'll have less going wrong.
That's a very good point. I would rather it be the buggiest game in history with things happening in it rather than a glorified screen saver simulator.
you are so fucking right... they're scared of complexity, they must have a lot of turn over if their team isn't comfortable working in the creation engine 😂😂
There were two possible outcomes. Bethesda breaks the mold and makes a space game by Bethesda, or, Bethesda makes a Bethesda game set in space. The odds on the former happening were extremely remote.
Why are so many people eager for Bethesda to make a game that doesn’t feel like a Bethesda game? There are other studios and millions of other games. Just play something else
I think that's for the best, because the last few years are littered with studios that have tried something outside of their established wheelhouse only to fall on their face. After Fallout 76, Bethesda just needed to do what they do best and give us a big, jank game that's essentially an excellent base product for modders to go apeshit with. Essentially, the two choices were a game that can be fixed with mods and a game that can't be, and I know which one i'd pick (I have no fucking clue why you'd play any Bethesda game on a console though).
And I'm here on PlayStation praying for Bethesda to release them on the platform (aint happening I know its Microsoft now). Very unlucky because I just love their games nobody does it better
Yeah i had so much fun with the vanguard and pirate quest. And going into the main story is sooo much less interesting. Being an inside man in a pirate outpost is so much more interesting than typical spooky alien plot
Their engine also just can’t handle it. The trains in Fo3 were NPCS clipping through the ground with Train “Hats” on and increased speed. I’m not joking.
@@lukewarmape603its been proven that they didn't even try because one guy alone made fully functional vehicles with actual physics in New Vegas for a mod called The Frontier which sadly is required to have the cars at all as they never got released as a stand alone mod. Oh and he managed to do that in just a few years. By himself.
Honeslty the UC vanguard felt WAY more like a “main story” to me than the constellation. I honestly wonder if it was intended to be the main story and they changed it to the constellation at the last minute. Everything about the main constellation quests feel extremely lazy and are so boring outside of maybe a couple missions.
Because the main quest is the end game or NG plus and it think it was supposed to be the last thing you did. You would of explored your world before entering the others.
@@ImPacTMaSTer1facts after The Legacy Questline which I swear I was loving and the decisions you make during that everything else is just lackluster. Main story doesn’t really have the same weight
I think the whole Bethesda ships broken games thing comes from Fallout 76 (which I haven't played) because I played every other game and while yes, of course, there's a million glitches of all types just because ya know, creation engine, but game breaking bugs? Played probably over 1000 hours of Fallout-Elder Scrolls and never really encountered one.
I'm dubious of that 12 hour claim anyway. The game just came out, we don't even know whats possible in this game. Once we learn the game we could realize that half the stuff we did on the first playthrough wasn't necessary or we could just download an alternate start mod. There's just so much we arent familiar with yet. We don't know the quest resolutions, there aren't mods out, the exploits/glitches aren't known, the speedrunning scene doesn't exist yet. You can't judge a game like this based on the first playthrough out of hundreds. Like, nobody had level 100 enchanting 2 hours into their first Skyrim playthrough, but now its trivial to do that with the Dawnstar chest, fortify restoration loop, mods, console commands, whatever. But it's not like they added the ability to do that after everyone's first playthrough; power leveling enchanting was always possible, we just didn't know it yet. There's so much that's possible in Starfield, we just don't know what yet.
@@noahphillips681 Right, but you shouldn't have to either beat a game completely or look for guides online to figure out how to play in a way that makes it fun. It should just innately be fun.
@@noahphillips681I can, I’m 5 hours in and the dialogue is garbage, the exploration is ass and the combat is mid. Graphics aren’t even good. Cyberpunk takes 10 minutes to hook you
@@JamesEatWorld7758 The entire point is to -explore- aimlessly wander around and look at shit without knowing what you are doing or care that you are doing anything at all.
This game felt more like an economy and business sim than an exploration spaceship game. I mean I understand why it is the way that it is but man idk maybe they should have stuck with 20 planets and made them all cool
It's more of a questing game than any sim at all. It plays best when it's like mass effect, and for me the 'good after 12 hours' only kicked in because I gave up on exploring altogether and started only doing missions, really on clue why they sold the exploration so heavily given how boring and uninteresting it is to do
Have you played Elite Dangerous? In Elite Dangerous is a lot more, from politics, economics, exploration, fighting, factions, mining in astroid belts and use seismic charges to get to the rarest ores (oh the seismic charges from Eilte Dangerous and Boba Fetts seismic charges almost sound the same), understanding your ship better, if you ran out fuel you need to call in the "Fuel Rats" who are a bunch of Elite Dangerous players who help other players in the game if they ran out of fuel and transfer fuel to the player who ran out of fuel. Starfield is basically 3 games in 1: No Man Sky's, Elite Dangerous, and Star Citizen.
@@BlueCore2010 and is better than all 3 of those ED is boring, and just a space work game literally, trucking with a ship, mining, or transporting, etc. NMS quests and everything is just A-B and they won't give the community the main things they want. It's also very repetitive, and gets boring quickly. Star Citizen man that's just a mess rn, speaks for itself.
7:50 In fairness having a prominent character exposed for massive corruption only for them to retain their position and face no consequences is actually extremely realistic.
I haven't bought Starfield and I may not at all, but I was a bit startled by the NPCs in some videos. The "Uncanny Valley" has become an "Uncanney Vallis Marinaris" (IE: that Giant canyon on Mars the Size of the USA, coast to coast...) creeped dafuq out of me....😮 PLUS Starfield departed from Skyrim's Pickled Prune people or Fallout's Janky Animated Gopher people and went all the way back to Oblivion's Patented Potato People!
The only problem I have with the game is there is NO exploration. Quests are much better than other Bethesda games but man I hate the loading screens and having to space jump places over and over
It's literally the only thing I was looking forward to from a Bethesda game, and it's the one thing that is COMPLETELY missing. Like, the gameplay loop has always been dull, the one thing that made it worth it was "the world" and getting lost in it. Without it, it's just a bunch of tedious busywork. How can anyone enjoy this? It is beyond me honestly.
@@gamble777888 This is exactly it. The joy of exploration, something that was in almost every other Beth game, is almost entirely missing in Starfield. It's fetch quest, fast travel, fetch quest, fast travel, fetch quest fast travel.
It would be much better if i didnt have to change planets every 5 minutes. Even quests i got from big settlements required me to leave the planet right away.
yes...its unreal that bugs-as-long-as-its-not-game-breaking is the "bethesda" standard with all that time of development where did the polish even go...I mean I never expected the game to be bug free but the ones that exist really pull me out of the immersion
The state is not sad of game development in general. We have been spoiled this past year or so. Baldurs gate 3, elden ring, path of exile, armored core 6, tears of the kingdom, god of war Ragnarok, etc. The standard has been raised, Bethesda has not met it tbh.
@@RiderZer0The bugs part you can't throw BG3 into the convo. I competed the game it's great but it's like everyone ignored ACT3 which is a performance buggy cluster fuck. As well as kind of lack luster....man still likely game of the year but act 3 hurt my soul 🥲
All you babies demanding perfection before you can say anything positive is sad. Change your diapers. How is fewer bugs indicative of the sad state of things, you jaded mouth piece?
Good take. I think if the main quest was a little bit more compelling, or urgent or threatening or challenging, many of those issues you raised would be forgivable. The main story should have been a side quest or dlc... and faction quests should've been more central and urgent... like some big looming conflict.
I think the problem with having an urgent main quest is that it kind of takes away from doing anything else but the main quest coming from a narrative standpoint, which takes away from the immersion imo. Fallout 4 had this issue, there was such a sense of urgency with that main quest that you sort of felt stupid for doing anything else BESIDES the main quest. I can see the purpose starfield’s main quest is trying to serve and can appreciate it; it really does tailor itself to allow the player to focus on OTHER things without feeling as if you’re playing the game wrong. You’re really supposed to chip away at it rather than do it all in one go, which I personally really like.
@@sattlermusic2402 I see what you mean and I've seen other people argue this before, maybe I'm missing the point of a 'rpg'... or maybe this brand of rpg is not my thing. For me fo4 was brilliant since it sets up such a dilemma that you can solve in many ways, and all the factions can somehow get involved. I also liked that I could 'finish' the game in a relatively satisfying way, while having involved much of the story in the process. I can also flat out refuse most of the factions and still complete the game. In Starfield it feels like I can completely ignore all the faction quests and complete the game. I would imagine the Terramorph drama to be a rather pressing issue, for example. And the pirates are more if a nuisance than a threat. Nothing in the game seems truly urgent and I think it would help to make for a satisfying playthrough... for me then. And I cannot refuse constellation at all, which gives me Nuka World flashbacks 🤣 at least there i could murder all the raiders and be done with it lol All in good spirit btw.
No. Bad quest design and an RPG where your decisions have no consequences whatsoever is NEVER "forgivable." It's "forgivable" to stupid gamers who want the lowest common denominator game I guess, but it shouldn't be.
I heavily disagree with that. I don't think the main quest was half as bad as many haters make it out to be but that's besides the point. Making it "more urgent" is an absolutely terrible idea in a game that is about open world and exploration. Oblivion is a prime example of this.
The whole "Why is there no Map for any of the major cities" completely boggles my mind. I get totally lost in all the cities b/c I'll never remember where Joes shop was next to that bar. 😞
I agree that there should 100% be maps for cities, but what happened to people learning the layout of cities and remembering them in their brain? I used to remember where everything was in major cities like Whiterun, Riften, Windhelm, etc. in Skyrim, people know the GTA map like the back of their hand. Why can't people do the same for this game?
Just please god give us the next elder scrolls. No-one wants a god damn thing from Bethesda except the next elder scrolls. Stop wasting ours and your time Todd
That was my experience with Skyrim. That game was great with mods added to make the ladies prettier and have spicy grown-up fun with them. I may just wait a couple of years to get Starfield for that reason.
I'm convinced that if Bethesda were to hire a few members of the modding community and allow them to have some creative control, they could make their games WAY better.
@@cesj1yeah cause they can add features like FOV and other basic things mere hours after first contact with the game code. A studio could never reliably do that.
Yeah i bought baldurs gate instead and within the first play session we accidentally killed a main character, uncovered a druid traitor and went to go kill her but before the battle started my wife was able to convince the traitor to switch side with a nat 20. The freedom of choice and the ability for failures to happen and the game to carry on feels great
Charlie doesn't have the heart to put up another hour in Starfield but willingly watch hundreds of hours of One piece until it turns decent? Ok, Charles
13:50 there actually is a local map. It's not good, but it's there. If you push m it will take you to the space map, but from there, there's another button which will show the local map
Starfield really makes Bethesda show its age. There are a lot of things in the game that seem out of date because it is what the developer's were comfortable. Sticking with the same game engine did not do any favors either.
You can change an engine to give you what you need, and therein becomes a different engine than used in previous games. I think the real issue is ever since Morrowind saved them from going under, they've been afraid of taking risks. Morrowind was a make or break moment for the company, so they threw everything at the wall and took risks, and created an amazing game because of it. EVERY single game since has been a more dumbed down version, while not really improving on anything, outside of combat becoming more fluid. Entirely different Genre, but I'm hoping Larian, a company NOT considered a Triple A studio, making BG3 and also breaking out of the mold and taking risks, reinvigorates these older companies to take those risks, and try to actually be innovative, or at least different takes on how they do things. It shows that taking CALCULATED risks does pay off.
@@Th1sUsernameIsNotTaken you can only mod a engine so far, look at the pc versions of the older call of duty games... decades old bugs and exploits that STILL CAN BE USED to hack into peoples PC, at some point you got to demolish the house built out of 500 year old rotting wood and make one out of brick cement and steel.
This will never stop reminding me of "Game Design Mimetics (Or, What Happened To Game Design?)" by Kyle Kushtel. One of my favorite design articles: "Exploring recent trends in game design to try and figure out why everything is Fine and why that's terrible."
In my opinion, this is a result of another studio trying to fill in the gaps with games until their “big game” releases. I know starfield was in development for a long time but it’s still a “gap filling game” if elder scrolls will take 20 years to come out.
That assumes that they were working on Elder Scrolls at the same time. And unless they have a secret team that nobody knows about that isn't the case. The same team that worked on Skyrim and Fallout 4 is who worked on Starfield.
@@erickshunn8498 nah man that’s not even what I’m saying, it has nothing to do with two teams working on two different games, what I’m saying is THAT team probably just didn’t try as hard on this and really are waiting for Skyrim to pull out the big guns.
Everyone treats it like it's dog shit for 12 hours. It's just kinda slow but still playable. Its just not going to be that big hit you are expecting out the gate.
@@mc9723 LMAO god bro how low are your standards. Gamers really tolerate anything AAA devs shit out on their plates huh. 12 hours to get to actually enjoyable aspects/points of the game and you justify it by saying it's "just kinda slow but still playable" When the crux of your defense is "its still playable" you really are grasping at straws to defend a game's quality.
It’s no where near to 12 hours. More like 2. It’s basically like rd2. The first 2 hours are pretty damn boring but after that you are free to do what you want.
@@ssantos88 I think quite a few games demand that. Soulsborne games are generally brutal until you get the hang of it which can take hours. JRPGs can be pretty slow to start. Some games reward sticking around and others burn bright from the start but fizzle quickly.
I started suchhhh a cool side quest with a dope premise I was thinking the whole way to the ship "omg they're going to be blown away by what I tell them" Something these npc's lived their entire lives thinking otherwise. Everything they ever known will be flipped upside down... And i tell them and they're just like... "op well I kinda figured" and then boom... Like all the excitement and curiosity for the quest gone, the writing is weird like that is not how anyooneee should react. And it should have been the easiest quest to write because the circumstances should have been easy for the writer to place their own selves into if they needed the correct reaction.. Like just an additional 20 minutes to ponder how to write the single quest and they just... take the easiest, non-assuming route for most of the quests... Kinda a bummer..
@@user-zx3eo9qr9x I mean you're fine to think that but thats just your opinion. Best subjective way to look at is overall reception. Metacritic general score is 83. Steam reviews its mostly positive at 76% aka 7.6/10. So ye 7 or 8/10 general reception is pretty much a fine assessment.
@@wufflespuffs3744 is not an opinion starfield is boring and definitely didn't live up to the hype not even close for a game as big as starfield with the amount of hype surrounding it a 7/10 which is not even that is worst then that its a 5/10 but ill give you 7 its still a Failure everyone's shitting on how mediocre and bland it is and how they ones again farted out another soulless husk of game painfully average but go ahead and lie to yourself 👍👍
I’ll be honest, the main story does significantly come together after that 12 hour mark - even then, any minor conversation in Baldur’s Gate 3 is infinitely more interesting than the best dialogue in Starfield
Isn't that just their standard MO? Make a passable game and then leave it to the modding community to fix all the bugs and such? Seems Fallout 76 taught them nothing about making an actual stable game before throwing it out there.
@@dannymorrow6024 Terrible inventory management, many bad UI elements and it's stuck on 30fps, performance issues with too many inventory items, outpost placement bugs, no DLSS support, terrible AI etc.. The list goes on.
Imagine playing anything (especially a RPG) with no inner dialogue, just unconsciously following the markers waiting to be stimulated when your own consciousness isn’t even stimulating you.
Damn that's pretty much every rpg if you do enough mental gymnastics Like legit, you described Elden Ring, Pokemon, Yakuza, Divinity Original Sin 2, Witcher 3
@@Gamez4eveR Yeah, The original Deus ex is kind of shallow and simplistic if you look at it on a surface level, it's a janky cyberpunk shooter with stealth and hacking mechanics. But then you spend time to hack into emails, read some books, listen to some choice dialog and then it becomes amazing. It's role-playing.
I think the fact that you can’t fly your ship other than in space is my biggest beef. I understand not being able to fly everywhere continuously. But at least let us fly around and land on landing pads and stuff rather than needing to walk everywhere or take in game public transportation
I do wish u could fly on planets but flying through space would be a massive addition that nobody would use like the sailing I ac3 after a while u just wouldn't do it
Alana Pearce spent 7hrs trying to fly from one planet to another and when she reached the planet it ended up being a blurry PNG that she flew straight through.
@@nathanmitchell7961there are games like that though. Like Star Citizen. It’s really buggy and might be a scam, but at least you can fly to a planet without going through loading screens.
one of the odd thing i found with the no emotions is when they talk to other npcs they have heaps of emotion in cutscenes as soon as they turn to your character and talk just watch all emotion leaves their face
@@TheNapster153 hahahaahah they gonna take over soon nah but i think they actually made it so the npcs puprosefully lack emotion when looking at you almost like they didn't want a repeat of mass effect 3 whacky faces so they fully toned it down
I just don’t understand why they needed to add all these planets. They could’ve just limited us to like 10 really well designed planets and it would’ve been a slam dunk. Bethesda just loves to shoot them selves in the foot
I knew they bit off more than any triple A company could chew as soon as they announced 1000 planet’s. It’s almost impossible to make 1000 planets super fun to explore
This is more or less what I expected. Guess I’ll either get it on sale or wait till they announce a “Legendary Edition” or whatever (like with Skyrim).
IMO he did the moist meter by not doing it at all. says a lot about how disappointing and boring this game is. it put me to sleep in my chair more than once
@@steveyoung2877oh you for real? The game isn't bad, it's quite entertaining once you can go wherever the fuck you want and just explore, that's what bethesda games are about, wander on a planet, find a secret explore and study it, get a fancy special item or lore. And be happy about it, honestly maybe that's my opinion because I have 8000h in kerbal space Program and I just like the whole concept of space and visiting planets, but it really isn't that boring, you still got billion of quests and 100 planets with life, you can play as whoever you want and even fuck your sister.. I feel like or you played the game with the negative thoughts in mind or you expected everything to come to you right away
@@u-crm1145 hours, 10 hours, or 100 hours the gameplay loop is exactly the same. That’s all he’s saying and if you don’t enjoy the gameplay loop obviously you wouldn’t continue playing the game. Also it isn’t a moist meter he stated that in the video
@@u-crm114 Isn't that exactly what Charlie said? He isn't going to review it because he's not going to finish it. He's exhausted of the same old Bethesda formula and as a result he can't see himself continuing to play the game.
With skyrim, you could walk in one direction and end up at a weird ruin with maybe some cool loot and maybe an npc with a new story line. Or a body with a note and a cool dagger. Like why is it so straight forward now
Dont forget those devs who made fallout 3 new vegas, oblivion and skyrim is no longer in bethesda. And they are replace by non creative zoomers who have absolutly no soul. Dont forget music is meh w/o jeremy soule
@@krexolsen3692 yep, thought the "Developer Cult" had finally died with the crumbling of Bioware, Bungie and Blizzard's reputation. Old-school Beth fans never worshipped the ground Bethesda stepped on. They were their most scrutinous critics if anything. But ever since the ESO mmo got big and festered this huge fanatical cult fanbase; Bethesda somehow gained Golden Calf Developer status working on Starfield, despite more red flags ever before.. That and a bunch of Xbox fans desperate for ANYTHING they could lord over Sony fans.
@@krexolsen3692 the oldest gen z are like in their mid-late 20's and probably dont decide anything in games just yet (outside of small teams and indie projects). if 20 year olds are in charge or directing anything in a big dev studio then there's a problem. The people in charge of design and writing are likely millennials with gen x'ers like Todd at the top.
I think something important which a lot of people forget to mention when talking about exploration in Starfield is that the planets can have different biomes depending on where you land, which adds a bit more variety to what you can find when exploring a single planet. Being aware of that, I feel that I did get a bit more enjoyment out of exploration than some other players which I've talked to. However, I also agree that exploration isn't exactly enticing. The times in which I've actually taken care to explore a planet are often situational and I've only done it mostly to grind money or to scout for resources and outpost locations. Other than that, there's honestly not much to reward the player aside from the chance of maybe seeing some good alien wilderness. It's a shame too I think, because the idea of planets with multiple biomes is something I've not really seen touched upon in sci fi and I feel that Bethesda could've done more with it; like imagine if a planet had more than two settlements sprinkled around in different biomes. Wouldn't that be more interesting than having just one or two settlements on a single planet, with only a single biome to explore around them?
I think most sci fi suffers from the idea that no other planet except earth can have such a wide range of biomes and communities. It’s like, “this is desert planet, this is snow planet” which if you think about it, is super uncreative when we have our own planet as a perfect example of how different two places can be on one planet.
i do get this criticism but i also dont know what people expected? hand crafted cities on all 1000 planets? its hard to make a planet feel "full" because they are planets, we have no in real life thing to go on becuase IRL planets are empty
I play the game, get a notification on my phone and the next thing I know I'm 25 minutes into a youtube video amd just realised starfield is still on right at the side of me!
My main issue so far is how back and forth it all is, like you'll get sent to one planet, then talk to someone just to get sent to another, and it's all way too complex for just that, like you go back to your ship, take off, in space you then fast travel, land the ship, get out, talk to someone, and back you go and do it all again, it just isn't really that fun imo :(
True, bethesda games do this a lot, but at least on Fallout for example im just fast travelling to a building, not having to go to my ship, go to space, then back to a planet, they've just drawn it out a lot which personally i dont like @@thememeilator2633
just fast travel from the planet you're on and skip a vast percentage of the back and forth lol. You dont need to even touch your ship to travel to different planets alot of the time.
its more the game has allot to do and at the start you think this is alright, and then after more so 4-7 hours you start to see the depth exploring things you want to partake in side quests that peek yoyur interest more than others. where as for the first 4 -7 hours your just doing totorial mistions and working things out. but i agree you cant force people to play 7 hours of sth they dont engage with, and some people just dont.
Stockholm Syndrome takes 12h to settle in. The one interesting I saw from the game is the end, its the No Mans Sky "ending" but instead of a new universe, its a dimension where you restart the game.
I'm honestly very excited for modding community than the vanilla game itself. They are insane with their ability to change the game so much in a lot of ways with many quality of life changes.
@@BoogChannelI don't think starfield has enough, space travel just isn't in engine, modders will only be able to make new instances, which could be bigger than the base, but still, the layout isn't as good as skyrim with the nearly seamless gameplay. Glad my buddy lent me the game cus he got bored with it after beating it.
It shouldn’t take the modding community to make the game feel polished 😂 . Def when the starting price is at 70. The game is fun but not 70 dollars worth of fun. Bit of a let down for me personally :3 . Imo it’s not acceptable for the price they are charging.
I think the idea around it getting good after 10 - 15 hours means like, you already have to be kinda enjoying it at least, and maybe just find a few things frustrating, THEN it can improve from an enjoyable experience to a really great one. But if you are over 10 hours in and having a really bad time with it, nah, it won't suddenly become great 15 hours in... It does get better, but not by enough to turn things around completely, you have to already at least find it enjoyable enough to begin with, see the potential, and just have a few niggles with it that you don't like, for things to improve greatly later on.
Yeah, I like starfield, but it's a terrible argument to ever make. It's like when my SO has tried to talk me into getting int One Piece in the past; I'm not gonna suffer through the slog to get to the good bits
There is a map of sorts when you are in the wilderness of a world. You open your scanner and press RB on Xbox. The real annoying part is when you’re actually in a city and you want to find a specific store or location and you literally have to just aimlessly walk around or hopefully find a sign that points in the direction of whatever you’re looking for.
This. I was running around all of Jamisons 3 districts for an hour just to find the one store that sells adhesive only to find out it's in the underground district (can't remember the name) that isn't labeled at all
@@d4rkspaghett The Well, I think. I didn’t even know it existed until I found a random elevator. It’s just a really odd choice to not include something as practical and simple a map in your most ambitious game to date
@@viralarchitectthe cope is crazyyyy. I don’t understand why you can’t admit some thing as simple as missing a map from a major city is a bad design choice?
This gets me very concerned for Elder Scrolls 6. If they aren’t willing to improve their engine/systems for a brand new IP, then they aren’t likely to do it for ES6. Another big thing i’ve seen is NPC’s being basically non existent. In Skyrim you could walk up to literally anyone and they’d have a unique one liner or a dialog option. Here i’d run through a city trying to talk to every NPC running around and they would all give me “can’t talk right now”. Every single time. It just makes the world feel dead.
I’d have to imagine they’re revamping their engine with ES6. Starfield has been in development forever, I think it was the swan song to it. I only have a PS5 unfortunately, but the game seems it was a passion project and they put it all into it. I just think ES6 being full focus now allows this chapter to close and revamp it all.
What I find even more hilarious about Charlie's description of the facial expression range (5:40) is that's pretty much the extent of the expressions which you got from characters in cutscenes in the game The Terminator: Future Shock (1995) which was, of course, created by Bethesda Softworks. It's good to know some things never change.
adopt my philosophy about this company, it makes it easier to swallow the pill. I just call them Betasda. I have never played an actual completed game they have made, every single title ever made by them isn't finished or has a lackluster amount of content or lacks it. every single one. even skyrim has significant down time. we are just beta testers for a series of games that is entirely just the culture of "Add-on" users in MMO's but also mods that really change the game. Bethesda is Betasda. even doom 3 was ass back when.
eeeh. to each their own, I went with betasda because it gives them about as much effort as they do towards Quality Assurance. I have to do less mouth movements to say it@@novatriio
When there's not enough change, I choose violence. In my playthrough with that side quest he ended up being replaced because of that. I do agree that maps, or at least icons for stores would be HUGE for hard to find areas, they need a hover bike or something for mounted combat.
I am someone who absolutly loves the original unchanged bethesda experience. But for me, that ended at Skyrim. from daggerfall on upwards to morrowind, & oblivion, including FO3 (id include New Vegas but it was made by obsidian) was the classic unchanged bethesda experience. Those are some of my favorite games of all time. For Skyrim they hired emil pagliarulo as a writer & the quality of the storyline & quests tanked. I know a lot of people enjoyed skyrim's quests & story but I didnt because I couldnt help but compare their quality to the previous games. I still enjoyed the world they built & some various other things but the simple watered down "chosen one" power fantasy just turned me off entirely. I swear emil must have been a children's author before being hired at bethesda because everything he writes or is part of feels like it is made for only small children to enjoy. I enjoyed some mechanics in fallout 4 such as the settlement building system, but otherwise once again the storylines (besides far harbor) were bland simple good vs. evil in the most watered down basic way personified. I have not purchased any bethesda games since then, & I have no regrets. They went from being my favorite devs to not even worth buying for me. Until they get beck to their roots, I will never give them another penny of my money. & fuck them for thinking it was somehow appropriate to make their biggest fanbase (TES) wait 15+ years for the next installment of the game that brought them the success they enjoy today. That is completely unacceptable. When TES6 is released, all bethesda will get from me is the middle finger.
I mean New Vegas showed that Bethesda had no clothes. Nothing you do in a Bethesda game actually matters within the context of the story or world. You could be a rogue/wizard/melee/ranged/sneak/cheat/murderer whatever, IT WILL NEVER CHANGE ANYTHING WITHIN THEIR GAMES. This is absolutely un-fucking-forgivable in an RPG. New Vegas changed that. It made your perks and decisions actually matter. I didn't even have to fucking fight the last boss in New Vegas because my speech was so high, and the conversation was ACTUALLY INTERESTING! Nothing like that ever happens in a Bethesda game. It's embarrassing that gamers have accepted their slop for so long. Bethesda has gotten so lazy it's unreal.
I've played for 14 hours and what do you mean by "good". I was enjoying myself from the first moment I left the mine and started combat. Sure the pacing is still slow, but once I had the ship and landed on New Atlantis I just did what I wanted. I eventually went back into the main quest but I was doing some side questing and traveling separately. Now after 14 hours I already have the Mantis ship because the first ship is crappy for space combat.
As a kid, I fell in love with the few open-world titles that were available at the time. I'd get infinitely excited when immersing myself in these worlds, thinking of all the potential and untapped potential. We no longer have the limitations we had back then, and i've yet to see any progress. As a great man once said, "good graphics are the just the sprinkles on the cupcake".
The graphics are sub-par, anyways. I genuinely reckon they are using Starfield as Vapor-ware to see if people will buy into a decade old style of game - with little to no effort sprinkled in. I’m confident they don’t want ES6 to have this kind of divisive community opinion. So they’ll legit knee cap an entirely new IP to Tee-up ES6.
Can completely agree with you here. I thought that maybe it was just because I'd grown up and no longer had that big imagination I once had. There are still a few games though that give you that same feeling, Baldurs Gate 3 is providing that similar feeling right for me right now tbf. - Love the quote at the end of your comment - He really is a great man 😂
While it hasnt been open world games ive loved, I loved a lot of genres, and sadly this is true for so many things. The release of Sons of the Forest for example, its the same as the original The Forest, but with a bad NPC companion, tedious and straighr up buggy/unfinished features. And that is excused, somehow. Even in that terrible state it got so much love from people, I dont know why. We need some actual good releases instead of the same games or new games in bad states.
@@Wataheadable weird to me the graphics easy come out on top of cyberpunk, they just sorta feel better than average for the last couple of years of games
Any time you hear a game studio saying they're going to make procedurally generated world in a 3D environment... RUN! It's always going to be a barren and empty world to explore.
It's really overrated.. It's either every planets somehow are full of structures and aliens like No man sky or a whole bunch of emptiness if games' being a bit realistic at all.
I mean, they did say that the PG planets would be barren but full of resources and stuff. And all planets with life on them are not procedurally generated, the only ones that are PG are the ones labeled “Barren” I’m pretty sure. And there’s a lot of “Barren” planets and “Rock” planets with zero life on them, but tons of resources. Those planets are meant for dungeons, looting, resources, and outpost potential. The 100 planets that have life and tons of quests to do are clearly better than the PG planets as the ones with life are hand-crafted (mostly). I just think the vast majority of complaints about this game are about insignificant issues that Bethesda never tried to oversell in the first place. They were outright about the fact that most of the planets would be barren, procedurally generated resource/dungeon hotspots. This game had a good story, compelling and actually has some pretty significant consequences to certain decisions, something Bethesda lacked in Fallout 4. They didn’t oversell this game. They sold it as “another same old bethesda game” and what we got was another same old bethesda game. The complaints are just because if it’s a video game, no matter how good the game may be or how little the devs lied or oversold it, there’ll be some gamers who call it a flop all because you can’t get 1000 deeply detailed planets. We get 100 deeply detailed planets which is already more than astounding. The other 900 are lovely resource/loot farms. Classic bethesda fashion. They sold it like that too. A game studio can’t make an entire galaxy of detail in only 7 years. If they tried to detail every single planet, they’d likely take two goddamn decades.
@@kipthebunbun fr tho the random planet landing is just a small part of the game, that can be completely ignored yet for some reason is ruining the game?
I think it's important to have opinions like this. Rarely do we hear if a reviewer actually finished a game, and if they did finish it, how much they wanted to (or not to) finish the game or play beyond its endpoint. Most reviewers play games because it's an assignment for them and their writing reflects that. I know Charlie does it for content & views but it does seem like he genuinely wants to try to explore the new and fresh things in games, movies, and other pop culture.
“Everyone says the game gets good after 12 hours.” I’m so fucking sorry. If I have to wait a half a day for the game to get good, it’s not a good game. Imagine if a 16 or 20 episode TV show came out, a full hour per episode, and people said “after episode 12 it really picks up. It gets so good.” The show would be canned. It’d be left on the side of the road with its wallet gone. I’ve sung enough praise for Baldur’s Gate 3 lately, but here’s a bit more: BG3 pretty instantly hooks you. Starts out “well I’ve gotta get this parasite out of my head” and the story grows from there. By the first hour, it had players hooked. Which is what a game is supposed to do.
Развлечения
"In a side quest someone high up gets exposed for corruption and nothing changes." I for one applaud this games commitment to realism.
🫃🏿
Lmao
Damn xD SAVAGE!!! but gold....
Jail Hunter and Joe 2024
@@martymcfly88mph35Do it in 2023 instead my guy.
Remember, Charlie is the guy who finished Gollum out of pure spite.
Truly one of the determinations of all time
Idk, this one seems like a tall order for him unfortunately
the man is literally fueled by awful games its his favorite pastime
i encourage you to form your own opinions on things instead of copying your thoughts and feelings from a youtube personality.
Forgot about that lol But to be fair, spite is a powerful motivator. Apathy is ... not
Imagine if they made one system with 10 planets, with ground vehicles, gameplay-based and in-atmosphere flight, and total planet exploration with no invisible walls.
Just play no man's sky
this would be cool but it doesnt work with this games story
A star wars game like this would be crazy.
@@atub7055it's actually on its way. But unfortunately it's being made by Ubisoft..
Star Citizen?
It's never gonna get out of Alpha, though.
The ship builder has no business being so good when 99% of your experience with your ship will be a glorified cinematic fast travel loading screen cutscenes
the loading screens have lasted an average of 12 seconds for me lmao, really doesnt bother me that much
And 90% of the habs are useless and don't contain any workstations
@@aveb.7371it’s still kinda lame
@@aveb.7371 12 seconds just to enter and exit every little shop or door or room or interaction adds up and gets real tedious real fast
@@aveb.7371 12 seconds ? its still a lot, actually.
i hate the argument that "modders can fix what's wrong with the game" because it removes the responsibility of creating a quality product from the actual, main developers and thrusts it upon people who aren't being paid to make mods and are making these mods out if passion.
devs should make the game great modders should only be adding to that greatness. but yeah its modders fixing the game LMAO
It doesn't remove their responsibility. It's just an admission of the fact the devs can't do it.
7.5 Billion Dollar company relies on free labor to finish their product. Capitalism and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
it seems like that responsibility was removed like 20 years ago. Most triple AAA games suck to anyone that has played a good game and is not 14
It's even happening in esports. They've just released another last gen NBA 2K game for PC & modders are working to make the graphics reflect the current gen. This is the 4th game now using dated everything (a repackaged 2K20)
Any time I hear that a game gets good after X amount of hours, it feels like the game is telling me that if I don’t enjoy it at its worst I don’t deserve it at its best.
then play it yourself instead of hearing other peoples takes to form your own opinion and to see if you get hooked onto it yourself
nah, if im paying $70 dollars for a game, the game NEEDS to have a general consensus that the game is good. End of story. don't play dice with my $70-$100 :D@@sxazon8360
@@sxazon8360 A lot of other things I'd rather do than waste 12 hours on something mid just for a _maybe_
If a single play through can go for hundreds of hours I think it’s fair to not bombard the player with every mechanic and quest line all at once
It reminds me of a quote from Yahtzee Croshaw on his Zero Punctuation review of Final Fantasy XIII.
"Some people have told me that FF13 gets good about 20 hours in. You know that's not really a point in its favor, right? Put your hand on a stove for 20 hours and yeah, you'll probably stop feeling the pain, but you'll have done serious damage to yourself."
I think my favorite thing about the Starfield cope is when people bring up how many loading screens you need to sit through, the main thing they say is "Well would you wanna sit and travel through empty space for 7 hours???" Like No Mans Sky...an indie game, has figured out how to do just that thing and it not take 7 hours, and its entertaining. So tired of the abused spouse syndrome Bethesda fans have adopted.
Let's see, sit through a 3 second loading screen so you can go to a planet with hundreds of NPCs, dozens of quests, thousands of interactable objects... Or sit through a ten second loading screen in no man's sky disguised as a planet fall animation... So you can visit a planet with maybe 2 dozen NPC's, no quests, no interactable objects, no dialogue options and a handful of cut and paste structures with nothing to do in them, hmm, which one should I choose?
@@timothyarnold1679 its almost like one had an infinitely larger budget to work with and still released the game with the full intention of letting the modding community complete it for them. cope as hard as youd like Starfield is a subpar game lacking features games way under their budget have been able to complete.
@@joetatos8687 No, actually it's almost like angry playstation fan boys are bombing the reviews on this game because they're crying in their pillows that they can't play It.
I effectively pointed out how your argument was dogshit and you can't, to borrow a phrase from you "cope with it".
@@timothyarnold1679dozens of boring chores to do, and extremely empty world to explore
@@timothyarnold1679star field is trash kid
They should have done like.. 100 planets with 10X the content instead of the 1,000 planets
Yea, it feels like way too much padding.
Flesh out 100 planets are so REALLY well instead of inundating with the same copy/past nonsense.
And don't get me started on the found locations. They're exact copies of one another.
"Oh- another crashed starship. I wonder what this will reveal."
"Oh hey, this frozen-over underground lab looks AWFULLY familiar."
Heck I’ll take 10 content filled planets
@@chriswhite3692 No man's sky kind of does the same. Massive planets full of thousands of the same dozen or so structures.
I don't think art teams can put together 1000 New-Atlantis like cities in any reasonable length of time.
Maybe in future procedural generation will get some more research in this direction, it should be possible.
I feel like you guys went out of your way to explore the empty zones and ignore all the content the game offers on purpose lmfao
@@Gamez4eveRpretty possible they just haven't played the game and can't form an opinion on their own
The game boring him to sleep is really a powerful statement coming from the man who grinded all runescape skills to max
86 mining and I wanna paint the ceiling.
Yeah - exactly the same thing happened to me playing D4. I fell asleep many times during the campaign and I played WoW and grinded that game for well over 15 years.
People be coping hard.
Based off literally everything he’s saying. He didn’t past 6 hours in. And there was only 1 article saying you need to be 12 hours in before you have fun. That’s like saying World of Warcraft doesn’t get fun til 100 hours in. If you’re not having fun and don’t like open world games with story then don’t play it. I don’t mind a reviews on Starfield but he really shouldt be saying all this with less than 10 hours in a game that’s suppose to be 200 hours
@@GaryGlass1it's called bandwagoning. It's a hot topic right now so everyone is giving their very little experienced take on things that require hours to digest. It's fine. Just keep enjoying the game. People want too much new and don't appreciate the good stuff we have but then want the old ways and it goes on and on..
OSRS we like it out of Stockholm at this point, the late game is one of the worst exp grinds in any game to ever exist, it was designed in a way they thought no one would ever get a 99. They just underestimated how we get stuck into these loops.
Can we appreciate how charlie never fails to spread our cheeks and put content inside us
💀
yes, so wholesome 🥰
I’m better than penguinz0, My content is better!
Ayoo pause
My farts are better than Charlie’s farts!!
charlie is actually more expressive than starfield npcs and thats insane
hahahahahaha im new here, thats funny af.
My brother a rock is more expressive than starfield npcs.
He’s not
I've played about 400-500 hours of Fallout 4, and although more than half of that was spent making Settlements I did get incredibly tuned to the cogs and wheels behind the game. When I began playing Starfield I immediately noticed I was playing FO4 with a space skin. Then I was introduced to that drug and found it to be Jet. Then I found a legendary weapon and realized the effects and even the effect's /names/ are exactly the same.
Exactly. It was still cool 8 years ago and pretty cool 12 years ago, but in 2023 I dont have time for outdated 2 generations old games.
@@johnhorak2000well if you have Xbox live with gamepass its a free install. Not much risk to play since you're not dropping $75
I dont think its like FO4 at all. In Fallout 4 there were so many interesting quests and locations. You can really just take of in any direction to encounter something interesting. My Starfield experience has been very bland as of now.
@@peterschmidt4212 sure, i also consider f4 superior game... the thing is that Starfield didnt improve anything to match or surpass other open world RPGs which were released in last 8 years. Yea there are some improvements here and there but a lot of games in last 8 years set the bar high and Starfield is not even close to consider it for wasting 100 hours there.
@@peterschmidt4212 I ment specifically under the hood. Sprinting, radiation, companions, consumables, etc.
I really want to see them make an incredibly condensed world, developers keep going bigger and bigger but all we actually want is something kinda big bit incredibly dense
YES!
literally play morrowind
Batman Arkham City is the perfect example of this. Not the biggest map but super packed and loaded with content that makes it feel way bigger
The rise of "open world" games saw great success over a decade ago and produced some incredible games. Maybe it's not your cup of tea but take Morrowind or Oblivion for example. But now we're beating a dead horse. Same thing with the whole superhero movie thing and the "Marvel Cinematic Universe", or other things like that. The reason why the relevant industry keeps spewing out complete bullshit is because they are trying to extract the most amount of profit by endlessly repeating the same "creative" formula, which by the definition of creativity is basically a snake eating it's own tail.
I'm a fan of games that are largely linear but just give you enough choice and variety here and there to not feel like you're on rails.
I just really don't have the time for massive sandbox titles anymore.
"It gets good after XX hours" is honestly the worst excuse anyone can ever use
Played for 30 hours. Then uninstalled. I haven't been this disappointed in a game since dragon age inquisition.
@@greenwendal5056 what aspects disappointed you? I've been having a blast since the start, currently 90h in
There’s nothing wrong with a little learning curve.
it's not
@@sattlermusic2402comparing a "learning curve" to a games ability to be captivating is about the most retarded case of copium ive ever seen. Holy crap, give this shillout fanboy a gold medal 👏
The fact that there’s working ladders in a Bethesda game is more impressive to me than flying in space
ironically, i fucking HATE the ladders especially on the ship. i refuse to use them, 3 levels is a ship redesign for me, and 2 levels i just jump pack.
And they're awful and awkward to use.
Oh boy, low bar eh?
Where's the ship elavators??...
@@bigfatchubbybritboy9445you mean a way to hide loading screens ala fo4? 😂
I remember one RUclipsr just called it a "Beam me up Scotty" game when he described Space Travel because of the Loading Screens. You just don't do it anymore unless mission calls for it. Also one of the funniest thing I heard screamed by a streamer was "I know this is an RPG game but, I didn't want to Roleplay as a Victim" when it came to Space Battles.
Dunkey put it into perspective really well, how people say it takes 12 hours to get good, while a whole lot of amazing game aren't 12 hours at all.
thing is, NO bethesda game requires 12 hours to get good, this far. Some even criticized Skyrim for having a very long intro, and that's barely an hour long.
But many times those experiences that only get good after 12 hours stick with you more than the 12 hours long good games. Akin to how many hate Dark Souls at first but end getting used to it and it becomes one of their favorite games... As much as I love indies, I don't really remember many of em long I play them.
@@Osama-KIN_TMZ01 Dark Souls takes maybe an hour to become amazing if you're new. If a game takes 12 fuckin hours to get good, its not good.
amazing game
only 12 hours
no I don't have the attention span of a fruit fly if it takes 12 hours for a game to get good thats solely on you.
@Osama-KIN_TMZ01 the Darksouls comment is 100% accurate. My thing is, I've gotten enjoyment from sandbox indie games (zomboid using it as the example since I've just recently started playing again) for hours more than the generic releases. I haven't touched a Bethesda game since playing skyrim a few months ago. I hated FO4, and the constant skyrim rereleases are stupid af. Bethesda lost all my respect when 76 came out. Play something worth while and not 60$ of recycled garbage to just hit the nostalgia factor.
I was really hoping that Starfield would take a page out of Cyberpunks book and make the interactions with characters more conversational and intimate rather than every character giving me the "You got games on your phone" stare.
I've never played CyberPunk2077, is it worth playing now?
@@Agent_3141 yes yes and yes please go play it .
@@Agent_3141YES. It was a dumpster fire on release, but now it's a very good game. I sank about 170h in 3 playthroughs. I played without QoL mods, so it could be even better
(To be clear, I bought the game this July, not on release)
@@Agent_3141yes they are about to drop their dlc adding a bunch of content that was missing. Most bugs not all "MOST" are gone if you want to experience a great story and characters I'd pick it up with the dlc
@@Agent_3141wait until you can get the game with its newest DLC at a rebate. It's a good game overall but lacked certain elements that are coming soon with the same patch that comes the day of the DLC's release.
This "It's good! After 10+ hours or 10+ episodes it gets good!" argument has always amused me a bit. Maybe it's a variation of a sunk cost fallacy? I don't know. But if a large part of the work is bad, then the whole cannot be very great either.
It 100% is sunk cost fallacy.
@@brianmattei7134I mean not every game can be good at all parts and some flop the intro.Spider-man for example is panned for having stealth section but I liked them.Different strokes for different folks I guess and it's good to have variable gameplay but in starfield's case,it's just sunk cost.
Easy to iron out bugs when you've notably reduced what can happen in your engine. Simply don't let people do things besides select a handful of dialogue options or shoot things, and you'll have less going wrong.
That's a very good point. I would rather it be the buggiest game in history with things happening in it rather than a glorified screen saver simulator.
you are so fucking right... they're scared of complexity, they must have a lot of turn over if their team isn't comfortable working in the creation engine 😂😂
There were two possible outcomes. Bethesda breaks the mold and makes a space game by Bethesda, or, Bethesda makes a Bethesda game set in space. The odds on the former happening were extremely remote.
Why are so many people eager for Bethesda to make a game that doesn’t feel like a Bethesda game? There are other studios and millions of other games. Just play something else
@charlescoryell4239 he legitimately said break the mold and make a Bethesda game, idk how you got not a Bethesda game from that
I think that's for the best, because the last few years are littered with studios that have tried something outside of their established wheelhouse only to fall on their face. After Fallout 76, Bethesda just needed to do what they do best and give us a big, jank game that's essentially an excellent base product for modders to go apeshit with. Essentially, the two choices were a game that can be fixed with mods and a game that can't be, and I know which one i'd pick (I have no fucking clue why you'd play any Bethesda game on a console though).
@@megamandrn001prey and dishonored are decent games to play on console
And I'm here on PlayStation praying for Bethesda to release them on the platform (aint happening I know its Microsoft now). Very unlucky because I just love their games nobody does it better
Star Field seems like a Great Game to buy in a few years once modders change the entire game into the Star Wars universe
That would be hype
Like every Bethesda game ever made.
@@mrminkman952 that's just false. Deluded hater. It's just not true for Skyrim and even falloutt
That’s definitely going to happen. It is a brand new Bethesda series, very exciting to see where the mod community takes us.
Free development team and Bethesda knows this.
I did the side quests before the main qusets, and the moment I was done with those, man, the drop in quality was unreal.
Yeah i had so much fun with the vanguard and pirate quest. And going into the main story is sooo much less interesting. Being an inside man in a pirate outpost is so much more interesting than typical spooky alien plot
@@tommygunz1174do you plan on finishing the game?
@@MilesJ. I do yes, main story picked up a little and I can confidently say the main story is mid
I would prefer 10 planets with 100 things to do on them than 1000 planets with 4 things to look at.
I'm guessing vehicles were not added because they would increase the amount of times players hit those invisible walls
Their engine also just can’t handle it. The trains in Fo3 were NPCS clipping through the ground with Train “Hats” on and increased speed. I’m not joking.
@@lukewarmape603wait what???
@@lukewarmape603 I would not at all be surprised if they just couldn't figure out how to make vehicle suspension work on rough terrain xD
@@lukewarmape603its been proven that they didn't even try because one guy alone made fully functional vehicles with actual physics in New Vegas for a mod called The Frontier which sadly is required to have the cars at all as they never got released as a stand alone mod. Oh and he managed to do that in just a few years. By himself.
@@rioplatsrefer to my comment cause you're right
Charlie's face in this video had more expressions than the entire Starfield cast in 100 hours of gameplay
thats saying something when charlies videos usually have the personality of a wet mop
But but but the expressions get better after 12 hours of gameplay!
me andromeda levels of face tired?
@@antoniomadrigal9181the games good before the first 12 hours just mfs have low attention spans nowadays have a little patience y’all
I laughed out loud. Well done.
Honeslty the UC vanguard felt WAY more like a “main story” to me than the constellation. I honestly wonder if it was intended to be the main story and they changed it to the constellation at the last minute. Everything about the main constellation quests feel extremely lazy and are so boring outside of maybe a couple missions.
Because the main quest is the end game or NG plus and it think it was supposed to be the last thing you did. You would of explored your world before entering the others.
Crimson raiders and ryujin quest were also enjoyable after that the game had nothing for me
@@ImPacTMaSTer1 straight up shame how undercooked that game was bro
I'm just happy I didn't have to pay for it got the steam key with my pc build @@btllofaro
@@ImPacTMaSTer1facts after The Legacy Questline which I swear I was loving and the decisions you make during that everything else is just lackluster. Main story doesn’t really have the same weight
Ironically this is the first game from them that I run into game breaking bugs, specifically something with the objective completion triggers.
I think the whole Bethesda ships broken games thing comes from Fallout 76 (which I haven't played) because I played every other game and while yes, of course, there's a million glitches of all types just because ya know, creation engine, but game breaking bugs? Played probably over 1000 hours of Fallout-Elder Scrolls and never really encountered one.
"The game gets good after 12 hours" is the same as "If you drive 4 hours to another state, you can get some pizza that most would consider acceptable"
I'm dubious of that 12 hour claim anyway. The game just came out, we don't even know whats possible in this game. Once we learn the game we could realize that half the stuff we did on the first playthrough wasn't necessary or we could just download an alternate start mod. There's just so much we arent familiar with yet. We don't know the quest resolutions, there aren't mods out, the exploits/glitches aren't known, the speedrunning scene doesn't exist yet. You can't judge a game like this based on the first playthrough out of hundreds.
Like, nobody had level 100 enchanting 2 hours into their first Skyrim playthrough, but now its trivial to do that with the Dawnstar chest, fortify restoration loop, mods, console commands, whatever. But it's not like they added the ability to do that after everyone's first playthrough; power leveling enchanting was always possible, we just didn't know it yet. There's so much that's possible in Starfield, we just don't know what yet.
@@noahphillips681 Right, but you shouldn't have to either beat a game completely or look for guides online to figure out how to play in a way that makes it fun. It should just innately be fun.
@@noahphillips681I can, I’m 5 hours in and the dialogue is garbage, the exploration is ass and the combat is mid. Graphics aren’t even good. Cyberpunk takes 10 minutes to hook you
@@alchemist9905 Cyberpunk is 🤮
@@Rob-lv3rj cyberpunk has far better writing, better combat, better seamless exploration, better graphics, what does starfield do better ?
The no map thing is crazy to me… especially since Skyrim’s map at the time was one of its coolest innovations in my opinion.
Been playing it. There definitely is a map what are people talking about
It's not crazy if you believe they purposely didn't add maps to make exploring "better" and last longer.
The entire point is to explore
@@JamesEatWorld7758 The entire point is to -explore- aimlessly wander around and look at shit without knowing what you are doing or care that you are doing anything at all.
Who said there was no map? 😅
I hate how my followers never stfu. It's like "I'm gonna steal this shit and I don't need any feedback, Sarah."
it never gets good. there are highlights but the initial pacing and quality are consistent throughout
This game felt more like an economy and business sim than an exploration spaceship game. I mean I understand why it is the way that it is but man idk maybe they should have stuck with 20 planets and made them all cool
It's more of a questing game than any sim at all. It plays best when it's like mass effect, and for me the 'good after 12 hours' only kicked in because I gave up on exploring altogether and started only doing missions, really on clue why they sold the exploration so heavily given how boring and uninteresting it is to do
Have you played Elite Dangerous? In Elite Dangerous is a lot more, from politics, economics, exploration, fighting, factions, mining in astroid belts and use seismic charges to get to the rarest ores (oh the seismic charges from Eilte Dangerous and Boba Fetts seismic charges almost sound the same), understanding your ship better, if you ran out fuel you need to call in the "Fuel Rats" who are a bunch of Elite Dangerous players who help other players in the game if they ran out of fuel and transfer fuel to the player who ran out of fuel. Starfield is basically 3 games in 1: No Man Sky's, Elite Dangerous, and Star Citizen.
@@BlueCore2010who cares
@@BlueCore2010 and is better than all 3 of those ED is boring, and just a space work game literally, trucking with a ship, mining, or transporting, etc. NMS quests and everything is just A-B and they won't give the community the main things they want. It's also very repetitive, and gets boring quickly. Star Citizen man that's just a mess rn, speaks for itself.
@k--music no it's story isn't nearly as good as mass effect which is the ONLY reason mass effect was the game it was
7:50 In fairness having a prominent character exposed for massive corruption only for them to retain their position and face no consequences is actually extremely realistic.
yeah but there isn't even dialogue changes yk
hillary clinton
@@Nigdolf rent free
If you're talking about that governer guy, he does get replaced eventually, it just takes a few days.
Yeah like Joe Biden.
I haven't bought Starfield and I may not at all, but I was a bit startled by the NPCs in some videos. The "Uncanny Valley" has become an "Uncanney Vallis Marinaris" (IE: that Giant canyon on Mars the Size of the USA, coast to coast...) creeped dafuq out of me....😮
PLUS Starfield departed from Skyrim's Pickled Prune people or Fallout's Janky Animated Gopher people and went all the way back to Oblivion's Patented Potato People!
The only problem I have with the game is there is NO exploration. Quests are much better than other Bethesda games but man I hate the loading screens and having to space jump places over and over
YES. Feels like a chore after a bit
It's literally the only thing I was looking forward to from a Bethesda game, and it's the one thing that is COMPLETELY missing. Like, the gameplay loop has always been dull, the one thing that made it worth it was "the world" and getting lost in it. Without it, it's just a bunch of tedious busywork. How can anyone enjoy this? It is beyond me honestly.
@@gamble777888 This is exactly it. The joy of exploration, something that was in almost every other Beth game, is almost entirely missing in Starfield. It's fetch quest, fast travel, fetch quest, fast travel, fetch quest fast travel.
It would be much better if i didnt have to change planets every 5 minutes. Even quests i got from big settlements required me to leave the planet right away.
@@paulw5039 And just an overwhelming amount of tedious pointless and drab dialogue.
Bethesda's formula is to build a base game, and let modders keep it alive.
Except Skyrim and Fallout 4 was decently good on their own. It sounds like Starfield hasn't been keeping up with any of the industry changes.
@@XXX3155 Agreed:)
Bro the idea that starfield isn't good on its own is absurd. There are critisisms, sure, but don't be ridiculous now@@XXX3155
skyrim was good on its own but every game since has been mid at best
@@XXX3155 fallout 4 seriously? Fallout new vegas was the only good Fallout game, and Bethesda didnt even make it.
When LESS bugs is a selling point for a SEVENTY DOLLAR game that shows how sad the state of game development is
yes...its unreal that bugs-as-long-as-its-not-game-breaking is the "bethesda" standard with all that time of development where did the polish even go...I mean I never expected the game to be bug free but the ones that exist really pull me out of the immersion
The state is not sad of game development in general. We have been spoiled this past year or so. Baldurs gate 3, elden ring, path of exile, armored core 6, tears of the kingdom, god of war Ragnarok, etc.
The standard has been raised, Bethesda has not met it tbh.
@@RiderZer0The bugs part you can't throw BG3 into the convo. I competed the game it's great but it's like everyone ignored ACT3 which is a performance buggy cluster fuck. As well as kind of lack luster....man still likely game of the year but act 3 hurt my soul 🥲
@@RiderZer0 i disagree, the standard didnt got raised. those games you listed are the old/actual standard.
All you babies demanding perfection before you can say anything positive is sad. Change your diapers.
How is fewer bugs indicative of the sad state of things, you jaded mouth piece?
Good take. I think if the main quest was a little bit more compelling, or urgent or threatening or challenging, many of those issues you raised would be forgivable. The main story should have been a side quest or dlc... and faction quests should've been more central and urgent... like some big looming conflict.
I think the problem with having an urgent main quest is that it kind of takes away from doing anything else but the main quest coming from a narrative standpoint, which takes away from the immersion imo. Fallout 4 had this issue, there was such a sense of urgency with that main quest that you sort of felt stupid for doing anything else BESIDES the main quest. I can see the purpose starfield’s main quest is trying to serve and can appreciate it; it really does tailor itself to allow the player to focus on OTHER things without feeling as if you’re playing the game wrong. You’re really supposed to chip away at it rather than do it all in one go, which I personally really like.
@@sattlermusic2402 I see what you mean and I've seen other people argue this before, maybe I'm missing the point of a 'rpg'... or maybe this brand of rpg is not my thing. For me fo4 was brilliant since it sets up such a dilemma that you can solve in many ways, and all the factions can somehow get involved. I also liked that I could 'finish' the game in a relatively satisfying way, while having involved much of the story in the process. I can also flat out refuse most of the factions and still complete the game.
In Starfield it feels like I can completely ignore all the faction quests and complete the game. I would imagine the Terramorph drama to be a rather pressing issue, for example. And the pirates are more if a nuisance than a threat. Nothing in the game seems truly urgent and I think it would help to make for a satisfying playthrough... for me then. And I cannot refuse constellation at all, which gives me Nuka World flashbacks 🤣 at least there i could murder all the raiders and be done with it lol
All in good spirit btw.
No. Bad quest design and an RPG where your decisions have no consequences whatsoever is NEVER "forgivable." It's "forgivable" to stupid gamers who want the lowest common denominator game I guess, but it shouldn't be.
I heavily disagree with that. I don't think the main quest was half as bad as many haters make it out to be but that's besides the point. Making it "more urgent" is an absolutely terrible idea in a game that is about open world and exploration. Oblivion is a prime example of this.
"I'm not trying to dump spoilers on you like a jump scare." 🤔
I like it.
The whole "Why is there no Map for any of the major cities" completely boggles my mind. I get totally lost in all the cities b/c I'll never remember where Joes shop was next to that bar. 😞
Yeah it's less hand holdy... Ya mad?
I agree that there should 100% be maps for cities, but what happened to people learning the layout of cities and remembering them in their brain? I used to remember where everything was in major cities like Whiterun, Riften, Windhelm, etc. in Skyrim, people know the GTA map like the back of their hand. Why can't people do the same for this game?
@lukaspumo3498 is a map considered “hand holdy” now, why are u gatekeeping a map lmao
@@lukaspumo3498uh, no, but you clearly are lol.
U just list games with a map lmao, gta? Skyrim?
This game will be great after 15 years of mod support
Yeah except mods will break every time they make an update where you can buy another subpar mod in-game, and doesn't actually fix anything
Just please god give us the next elder scrolls. No-one wants a god damn thing from Bethesda except the next elder scrolls. Stop wasting ours and your time Todd
@@HenrikBgelundLavstsen ahh, the true Bethesda experience. can't wait for -horse- ship armour packs
Idk it’s pretty good on Xbox rn
But yeah that’s a good way to farm likes.
That was my experience with Skyrim. That game was great with mods added to make the ladies prettier and have spicy grown-up fun with them. I may just wait a couple of years to get Starfield for that reason.
I bet it would be better if they added more alien that could survive outside of space and also can attack and board your ship just a thought.
I think my main issue is the game feels like Bethesda just expects the Modding Community to actually make their game interesting
I'm convinced that if Bethesda were to hire a few members of the modding community and allow them to have some creative control, they could make their games WAY better.
Unfortunately that would lose them money. And they like money.
creating a few mods is very different from creating the base experience itself.
and some optimizers 😎
They did hire a interior modding artist to the team that's why the scenes are so details and well make
@@cesj1yeah cause they can add features like FOV and other basic things mere hours after first contact with the game code. A studio could never reliably do that.
Yeah i bought baldurs gate instead and within the first play session we accidentally killed a main character, uncovered a druid traitor and went to go kill her but before the battle started my wife was able to convince the traitor to switch side with a nat 20.
The freedom of choice and the ability for failures to happen and the game to carry on feels great
Yeah, I refunded that trash when I saw the point and click turn based gameplay 😂
They really do hide that bullshit. It's a board game
@@kamalaharry9514they don't hide it 😅😅 if you look in the steam page it's very clearly isometric turn based
@@kamalaharry9514 you talkin about starfield or baldurs? starfield is the trash here.
@@SomeKindaSpy lmao if it ain't cod, they won't give a shit
@@kamalaharry9514 Well if you were dumb enough to buy something without knowing what it was before you bought what does that make you?🤔
Charlie doesn't have the heart to put up another hour in Starfield but willingly watch hundreds of hours of One piece until it turns decent? Ok, Charles
Starfield must suck huh
One piece is great ,just tough to catch up you if haven’t read it when it was fresh or as you grew up. 😅
13:50 there actually is a local map. It's not good, but it's there. If you push m it will take you to the space map, but from there, there's another button which will show the local map
Starfield really makes Bethesda show its age. There are a lot of things in the game that seem out of date because it is what the developer's were comfortable. Sticking with the same game engine did not do any favors either.
You can change an engine to give you what you need, and therein becomes a different engine than used in previous games.
I think the real issue is ever since Morrowind saved them from going under, they've been afraid of taking risks. Morrowind was a make or break moment for the company, so they threw everything at the wall and took risks, and created an amazing game because of it.
EVERY single game since has been a more dumbed down version, while not really improving on anything, outside of combat becoming more fluid.
Entirely different Genre, but I'm hoping Larian, a company NOT considered a Triple A studio, making BG3 and also breaking out of the mold and taking risks, reinvigorates these older companies to take those risks, and try to actually be innovative, or at least different takes on how they do things.
It shows that taking CALCULATED risks does pay off.
3rd person view💀
@@Th1sUsernameIsNotTaken you can only mod a engine so far, look at the pc versions of the older call of duty games... decades old bugs and exploits that STILL CAN BE USED to hack into peoples PC,
at some point you got to demolish the house built out of 500 year old rotting wood and make one out of brick cement and steel.
Did Bethesda also only hire three voice actors for this one too?
@@vanconojland eventually repeat when somehow said concrete has become wood once more lol. Just is the way of technology
This will never stop reminding me of "Game Design Mimetics (Or, What Happened To Game Design?)" by Kyle Kushtel. One of my favorite design articles:
"Exploring recent trends in game design to try and figure out why everything is Fine and why that's terrible."
In my opinion, this is a result of another studio trying to fill in the gaps with games until their “big game” releases. I know starfield was in development for a long time but it’s still a “gap filling game” if elder scrolls will take 20 years to come out.
That assumes that they were working on Elder Scrolls at the same time. And unless they have a secret team that nobody knows about that isn't the case. The same team that worked on Skyrim and Fallout 4 is who worked on Starfield.
@@erickshunn8498 nah man that’s not even what I’m saying, it has nothing to do with two teams working on two different games, what I’m saying is THAT team probably just didn’t try as hard on this and really are waiting for Skyrim to pull out the big guns.
Palworld has 1.8 million players, while scamfield does NOT! LMAO @ everyone who said this would be the "RPG of the decade"!
That award goes to BG3
What the fuck is a Palworld
The idea of playing a video game for 12 hours waiting for it to get good is insane to me.
Everyone treats it like it's dog shit for 12 hours. It's just kinda slow but still playable. Its just not going to be that big hit you are expecting out the gate.
i'd argue it's closer to 6 hours. either way the game isn't bad in the early hours it's just that it gets super good when you're further in
@@mc9723 LMAO god bro how low are your standards. Gamers really tolerate anything AAA devs shit out on their plates huh. 12 hours to get to actually enjoyable aspects/points of the game and you justify it by saying it's "just kinda slow but still playable"
When the crux of your defense is "its still playable" you really are grasping at straws to defend a game's quality.
What other people are saying. If anything it just “Turns from good to great” after that time frame. That’s why.
It’s no where near to 12 hours. More like 2. It’s basically like rd2. The first 2 hours are pretty damn boring but after that you are free to do what you want.
If a game doesn't hook me with a gratifying sense of fun in 4 hours, I move on.
Cool story, weird flex
@@whatsittoyou4153What flex? No one should be putting up 12 hours of not having fun to get to the good part.
I was 10x hooked on baldurs gate 3 then starfield. Just feels very off
@@ssantos88 I think quite a few games demand that. Soulsborne games are generally brutal until you get the hang of it which can take hours. JRPGs can be pretty slow to start. Some games reward sticking around and others burn bright from the start but fizzle quickly.
@@ssantos88yeah especially with the tiktok generation
I started suchhhh a cool side quest with a dope premise I was thinking the whole way to the ship "omg they're going to be blown away by what I tell them" Something these npc's lived their entire lives thinking otherwise. Everything they ever known will be flipped upside down... And i tell them and they're just like... "op well I kinda figured" and then boom... Like all the excitement and curiosity for the quest gone, the writing is weird like that is not how anyooneee should react. And it should have been the easiest quest to write because the circumstances should have been easy for the writer to place their own selves into if they needed the correct reaction.. Like just an additional 20 minutes to ponder how to write the single quest and they just... take the easiest, non-assuming route for most of the quests... Kinda a bummer..
That said the game is still okay to me, I beat it and still playing. Its like 7/10 that you play like a 10/10 if its your vibe.
Starfield sucks
@@wufflespuffs3744no way in hell starfields a 7/10 or anyone to Believe it's a 10 must be a blind drone
@@user-zx3eo9qr9x I mean you're fine to think that but thats just your opinion. Best subjective way to look at is overall reception. Metacritic general score is 83. Steam reviews its mostly positive at 76% aka 7.6/10. So ye 7 or 8/10 general reception is pretty much a fine assessment.
@@wufflespuffs3744 is not an opinion starfield is boring and definitely didn't live up to the hype not even close for a game as big as starfield with the amount of hype surrounding it a 7/10 which is not even that is worst then that its a 5/10 but ill give you 7 its still a Failure everyone's shitting on how mediocre and bland it is and how they ones again farted out another soulless husk of game painfully average but go ahead and lie to yourself 👍👍
Loading screen simulator "Everybody felt that"
I’ll be honest, the main story does significantly come together after that 12 hour mark - even then, any minor conversation in Baldur’s Gate 3 is infinitely more interesting than the best dialogue in Starfield
I would contest that. Been playing both and i find Cutscenes and Dialogue is where Baldurs gate sucks
@@Sgt.chickensthat’s actually an insane take icl
@@Sgt.chickensno way you just said that xD
@@Sgt.chickens damn how's it feel to be so hilariously and objectively wrong every day of your life?
Yea but after u reach the Planet X you can divide the
There's only two genders in the real world wake up
I have played 30 hours of this game and I just know that most of the time Bethesda waved issues away with "Mods'll fix it"
e
An example being?
Isn't that just their standard MO? Make a passable game and then leave it to the modding community to fix all the bugs and such?
Seems Fallout 76 taught them nothing about making an actual stable game before throwing it out there.
@@dannymorrow6024 Terrible inventory management, many bad UI elements and it's stuck on 30fps, performance issues with too many inventory items, outpost placement bugs, no DLSS support, terrible AI etc.. The list goes on.
Correction the NSFW mods will create a loyal community 😂
"The game gets good after X hours' the fuck are you talking about, i just payed for this game, it better be good from hour 1
Imagine playing anything (especially a RPG) with no inner dialogue, just unconsciously following the markers waiting to be stimulated when your own consciousness isn’t even stimulating you.
Damn that's pretty much every rpg if you do enough mental gymnastics
Like legit, you described Elden Ring, Pokemon, Yakuza, Divinity Original Sin 2, Witcher 3
@@Gamez4eveR Yeah, The original Deus ex is kind of shallow and simplistic if you look at it on a surface level, it's a janky cyberpunk shooter with stealth and hacking mechanics. But then you spend time to hack into emails, read some books, listen to some choice dialog and then it becomes amazing. It's role-playing.
I think the fact that you can’t fly your ship other than in space is my biggest beef. I understand not being able to fly everywhere continuously. But at least let us fly around and land on landing pads and stuff rather than needing to walk everywhere or take in game public transportation
I do wish u could fly on planets but flying through space would be a massive addition that nobody would use like the sailing I ac3 after a while u just wouldn't do it
This I agree on. We should be able to fly out if a planet and the transition be smooth. This the ONLY thing
Yes, it was really frustrating that I couldn't fly around to a different landing zone. Stopped playing after 2 hours.
Not being able to explore the planet with a vehicle was a bad decision by Bethesda.
@@dankus.memeokus4192Oh wow I guess No Mans Sky and Star Citizen never actually managed it then. What a brutal expectation lmao
Alana Pearce spent 7hrs trying to fly from one planet to another and when she reached the planet it ended up being a blurry PNG that she flew straight through.
NO WAY HAHA
Yea because not a space sim. Did you actually think there would be a fully detailed explorable planet? lol
In fairness…that’s on her. Why would you do that ffs 😂
@@nathanmitchell7961there are games like that though. Like Star Citizen. It’s really buggy and might be a scam, but at least you can fly to a planet without going through loading screens.
@@nathanmitchell7961 It was advertised as such !
All other space games allow it too, it's a bloody scam.
parents when you just got home from a party: 6:04
Bro talked so much shit before giving it a full chance, his "friend" didn't even drop the °moist meter° good job charlie.
one of the odd thing i found with the no emotions is when they talk to other npcs they have heaps of emotion in cutscenes as soon as they turn to your character and talk just watch all emotion leaves their face
NPC's getting self-aware by the day.
They know you. It's probably written in their recycled coding by this point.
@@TheNapster153 hahahaahah they gonna take over soon nah but i think they actually made it so the npcs puprosefully lack emotion when looking at you almost like they didn't want a repeat of mass effect 3 whacky faces so they fully toned it down
Bethesda and Ubisoft worst 2023 facial animations. They are stuck to ps3 level.
They recognise that you could quicksave and bash their face in any second if they look at you the wrong way.
You bore them and make their face tired
I just don’t understand why they needed to add all these planets. They could’ve just limited us to like 10 really well designed planets and it would’ve been a slam dunk. Bethesda just loves to shoot them selves in the foot
Marketing. "A thousand planets!"
I knew they bit off more than any triple A company could chew as soon as they announced 1000 planet’s. It’s almost impossible to make 1000 planets super fun to explore
Fair point, seems quite a few space games have tried to get by on quantity compared to quality.
Some gamers just soyjack when they hear "1000 planets"
excellent point
This is more or less what I expected. Guess I’ll either get it on sale or wait till they announce a “Legendary Edition” or whatever (like with Skyrim).
I would have loved if it was a mmo single player style see user made ships landing at ports ghost style figure of them walking around.
Huge respect for not wanting to do the moist meter if you don't want to finish the game, showing more integrity then most 'professional' game critics
IMO he did the moist meter by not doing it at all. says a lot about how disappointing and boring this game is. it put me to sleep in my chair more than once
damn. thats a perspective i didnt consider, him not doing a moist meter review is a review of its own@@steveyoung2877
@@steveyoung2877oh you for real? The game isn't bad, it's quite entertaining once you can go wherever the fuck you want and just explore, that's what bethesda games are about, wander on a planet, find a secret explore and study it, get a fancy special item or lore. And be happy about it, honestly maybe that's my opinion because I have 8000h in kerbal space Program and I just like the whole concept of space and visiting planets, but it really isn't that boring, you still got billion of quests and 100 planets with life, you can play as whoever you want and even fuck your sister.. I feel like or you played the game with the negative thoughts in mind or you expected everything to come to you right away
@@u-crm1145 hours, 10 hours, or 100 hours the gameplay loop is exactly the same. That’s all he’s saying and if you don’t enjoy the gameplay loop obviously you wouldn’t continue playing the game. Also it isn’t a moist meter he stated that in the video
@@u-crm114 Isn't that exactly what Charlie said? He isn't going to review it because he's not going to finish it. He's exhausted of the same old Bethesda formula and as a result he can't see himself continuing to play the game.
With skyrim, you could walk in one direction and end up at a weird ruin with maybe some cool loot and maybe an npc with a new story line. Or a body with a note and a cool dagger. Like why is it so straight forward now
It seems like they diluted the player experience entirely to 'walk to point on compass'. Or the classic supermutant orders
Kill
Loot
Return
Dont forget those devs who made fallout 3 new vegas, oblivion and skyrim is no longer in bethesda. And they are replace by non creative zoomers who have absolutly no soul. Dont forget music is meh w/o jeremy soule
@@krexolsen3692bro the guy who did the music for starfield also did the music for fallout 3 and new Vegas
@@krexolsen3692 yep, thought the "Developer Cult" had finally died with the crumbling of Bioware, Bungie and Blizzard's reputation. Old-school Beth fans never worshipped the ground Bethesda stepped on. They were their most scrutinous critics if anything. But ever since the ESO mmo got big and festered this huge fanatical cult fanbase; Bethesda somehow gained Golden Calf Developer status working on Starfield, despite more red flags ever before.. That and a bunch of Xbox fans desperate for ANYTHING they could lord over Sony fans.
@@krexolsen3692 the oldest gen z are like in their mid-late 20's and probably dont decide anything in games just yet (outside of small teams and indie projects). if 20 year olds are in charge or directing anything in a big dev studio then there's a problem. The people in charge of design and writing are likely millennials with gen x'ers like Todd at the top.
3:11
*EA sweats profusely*
I think something important which a lot of people forget to mention when talking about exploration in Starfield is that the planets can have different biomes depending on where you land, which adds a bit more variety to what you can find when exploring a single planet. Being aware of that, I feel that I did get a bit more enjoyment out of exploration than some other players which I've talked to.
However, I also agree that exploration isn't exactly enticing. The times in which I've actually taken care to explore a planet are often situational and I've only done it mostly to grind money or to scout for resources and outpost locations. Other than that, there's honestly not much to reward the player aside from the chance of maybe seeing some good alien wilderness.
It's a shame too I think, because the idea of planets with multiple biomes is something I've not really seen touched upon in sci fi and I feel that Bethesda could've done more with it; like imagine if a planet had more than two settlements sprinkled around in different biomes. Wouldn't that be more interesting than having just one or two settlements on a single planet, with only a single biome to explore around them?
I think most sci fi suffers from the idea that no other planet except earth can have such a wide range of biomes and communities. It’s like, “this is desert planet, this is snow planet” which if you think about it, is super uncreative when we have our own planet as a perfect example of how different two places can be on one planet.
Charlie’s room is probably worth more than my entire house in terms of value
i mean the youtube button alone might
The exploration and map criticism is spot on. While the planets you are exploring are pretty to look at, they feel really empty most of the time
true
i do get this criticism but i also dont know what people expected? hand crafted cities on all 1000 planets? its hard to make a planet feel "full" because they are planets, we have no in real life thing to go on becuase IRL planets are empty
you're right zoomerbro it needs BING BING WAHOOO CARS EXPLOSIONS AND ACTION! IT NEEDS MORE MORE MORE ON ALL TE PLANETS. 1/10 too slow too barren
@@photosbyskinweird Cope
@@austinbatton4849 its not really a cope because theyre right
It gets good after the community makes it better for us..
I play the game, get a notification on my phone and the next thing I know I'm 25 minutes into a youtube video amd just realised starfield is still on right at the side of me!
My main issue so far is how back and forth it all is, like you'll get sent to one planet, then talk to someone just to get sent to another, and it's all way too complex for just that, like you go back to your ship, take off, in space you then fast travel, land the ship, get out, talk to someone, and back you go and do it all again, it just isn't really that fun imo :(
That is most RPGs my man
True, bethesda games do this a lot, but at least on Fallout for example im just fast travelling to a building, not having to go to my ship, go to space, then back to a planet, they've just drawn it out a lot which personally i dont like @@thememeilator2633
just fast travel from the planet you're on and skip a vast percentage of the back and forth lol. You dont need to even touch your ship to travel to different planets alot of the time.
@@ryano4784this is true but its also a negative.
Game is still a bloody load screen simulator no matter what you do.
@@thememeilator2633that might be most RPGs but that's a shitty excuse for not trying to make it more interesting imo
Imagine watching a Netflix series and 12 hours in you can finally begin to enjoy it.
to be fair, breaking bad really opened up after s2.
@@Mudshudders EP 9 season 1, so 9 hours in.
its more the game has allot to do and at the start you think this is alright, and then after more so 4-7 hours you start to see the depth exploring things you want to partake in side quests that peek yoyur interest more than others. where as for the first 4 -7 hours your just doing totorial mistions and working things out. but i agree you cant force people to play 7 hours of sth they dont engage with, and some people just dont.
One Piece 💀
One piece
Stockholm Syndrome takes 12h to settle in.
The one interesting I saw from the game is the end, its the No Mans Sky "ending" but instead of a new universe, its a dimension where you restart the game.
The map thing is my biggest complaint. I go to a city and have to watch a video to find the weapon store.
I'm honestly very excited for modding community than the vanilla game itself.
They are insane with their ability to change the game so much in a lot of ways with many quality of life changes.
So you aren't excited about the game coming from the developer, but random ass people. What does that say about the developer? Lmao
@@donjohnson7491It says the developer makes a good base for modders to work with, just like how Skyrim became more of a engine then a game.
@@BoogChannelno, it says the developers made a bad boring game so the random people can fix their mess and make the game semi enjoyable
@@BoogChannelI don't think starfield has enough, space travel just isn't in engine, modders will only be able to make new instances, which could be bigger than the base, but still, the layout isn't as good as skyrim with the nearly seamless gameplay. Glad my buddy lent me the game cus he got bored with it after beating it.
It shouldn’t take the modding community to make the game feel polished 😂 . Def when the starting price is at 70. The game is fun but not 70 dollars worth of fun. Bit of a let down for me personally :3 .
Imo it’s not acceptable for the price they are charging.
I think the idea around it getting good after 10 - 15 hours means like, you already have to be kinda enjoying it at least, and maybe just find a few things frustrating, THEN it can improve from an enjoyable experience to a really great one. But if you are over 10 hours in and having a really bad time with it, nah, it won't suddenly become great 15 hours in... It does get better, but not by enough to turn things around completely, you have to already at least find it enjoyable enough to begin with, see the potential, and just have a few niggles with it that you don't like, for things to improve greatly later on.
Niggles??? Ayo
Sounds like bait to not be able to refund.
I had to stop and process when I saw "niggles"
A few what now
Yeah, I like starfield, but it's a terrible argument to ever make. It's like when my SO has tried to talk me into getting int One Piece in the past; I'm not gonna suffer through the slog to get to the good bits
The fact they're still using the same engine for Starfield (2023) they used for Morrowind (2002) with all the same bugs says a lot.
Not me playing the game having a great time while simultaneously agreeing with everything he's saying
There is a map of sorts when you are in the wilderness of a world. You open your scanner and press RB on Xbox. The real annoying part is when you’re actually in a city and you want to find a specific store or location and you literally have to just aimlessly walk around or hopefully find a sign that points in the direction of whatever you’re looking for.
This. I was running around all of Jamisons 3 districts for an hour just to find the one store that sells adhesive only to find out it's in the underground district (can't remember the name) that isn't labeled at all
@@d4rkspaghett The Well, I think. I didn’t even know it existed until I found a random elevator. It’s just a really odd choice to not include something as practical and simple a map in your most ambitious game to date
Kinda like the real world, eh? Meanwhile others complain that there are too many menus to open when you want to fast travel.
@@viralarchitectthe cope is crazyyyy. I don’t understand why you can’t admit some thing as simple as missing a map from a major city is a bad design choice?
@@jordancadiz6095 It honestly, is not. I think wandering around a city is kind of a nice change. I hate seeing a fucking ton of map markers.
This gets me very concerned for Elder Scrolls 6. If they aren’t willing to improve their engine/systems for a brand new IP, then they aren’t likely to do it for ES6.
Another big thing i’ve seen is NPC’s being basically non existent. In Skyrim you could walk up to literally anyone and they’d have a unique one liner or a dialog option. Here i’d run through a city trying to talk to every NPC running around and they would all give me “can’t talk right now”. Every single time. It just makes the world feel dead.
I’d have to imagine they’re revamping their engine with ES6. Starfield has been in development forever, I think it was the swan song to it. I only have a PS5 unfortunately, but the game seems it was a passion project and they put it all into it. I just think ES6 being full focus now allows this chapter to close and revamp it all.
Well just wait 40.years now 😂
I feel like eso took a lot of their resources and focus
At least that’s more than anything Cyberpunk 2077 did, lol.
I can just imagine npc's still being mannequins in 2027 when ES6's first gameplay trailer comes out
When everyone says you got to wait until season 2 of the office before it gets good😂
I'm happy with Starfield because all I expected and wanted from it was for it to be the Standard Bethesda Experience ™️ but set in space.
What I find even more hilarious about Charlie's description of the facial expression range (5:40) is that's pretty much the extent of the expressions which you got from characters in cutscenes in the game The Terminator: Future Shock (1995) which was, of course, created by Bethesda Softworks. It's good to know some things never change.
Facial expressions, bugs and war. Bethesda's holy trinity of "unchangeables"
adopt my philosophy about this company, it makes it easier to swallow the pill.
I just call them Betasda.
I have never played an actual completed game they have made, every single title ever made by them isn't finished or has a lackluster amount of content or lacks it. every single one. even skyrim has significant down time.
we are just beta testers for a series of games that is entirely just the culture of "Add-on" users in MMO's but also mods that really change the game.
Bethesda is Betasda. even doom 3 was ass back when.
@@kazehascoffeeBetathesda has a better ring to it imo
eeeh. to each their own, I went with betasda because it gives them about as much effort as they do towards Quality Assurance. I have to do less mouth movements to say it@@novatriio
@@kazehascoffee lol
6:06 That facial expression needs to go viral
Yes
When there's not enough change, I choose violence. In my playthrough with that side quest he ended up being replaced because of that.
I do agree that maps, or at least icons for stores would be HUGE for hard to find areas, they need a hover bike or something for mounted combat.
I am someone who absolutly loves the original unchanged bethesda experience. But for me, that ended at Skyrim. from daggerfall on upwards to morrowind, & oblivion, including FO3 (id include New Vegas but it was made by obsidian) was the classic unchanged bethesda experience. Those are some of my favorite games of all time. For Skyrim they hired emil pagliarulo as a writer & the quality of the storyline & quests tanked. I know a lot of people enjoyed skyrim's quests & story but I didnt because I couldnt help but compare their quality to the previous games. I still enjoyed the world they built & some various other things but the simple watered down "chosen one" power fantasy just turned me off entirely. I swear emil must have been a children's author before being hired at bethesda because everything he writes or is part of feels like it is made for only small children to enjoy.
I enjoyed some mechanics in fallout 4 such as the settlement building system, but otherwise once again the storylines (besides far harbor) were bland simple good vs. evil in the most watered down basic way personified. I have not purchased any bethesda games since then, & I have no regrets. They went from being my favorite devs to not even worth buying for me. Until they get beck to their roots, I will never give them another penny of my money. & fuck them for thinking it was somehow appropriate to make their biggest fanbase (TES) wait 15+ years for the next installment of the game that brought them the success they enjoy today. That is completely unacceptable. When TES6 is released, all bethesda will get from me is the middle finger.
I agree with everything but I am still hypes for Elders Scrolls 6
I mean New Vegas showed that Bethesda had no clothes. Nothing you do in a Bethesda game actually matters within the context of the story or world. You could be a rogue/wizard/melee/ranged/sneak/cheat/murderer whatever, IT WILL NEVER CHANGE ANYTHING WITHIN THEIR GAMES.
This is absolutely un-fucking-forgivable in an RPG. New Vegas changed that. It made your perks and decisions actually matter. I didn't even have to fucking fight the last boss in New Vegas because my speech was so high, and the conversation was ACTUALLY INTERESTING! Nothing like that ever happens in a Bethesda game. It's embarrassing that gamers have accepted their slop for so long. Bethesda has gotten so lazy it's unreal.
Starfield enjoyers: How long have you played for?
Also Starfield enjoyers: Oh yeah it gets good after that +1
I don't even think that statement has to be said. The game is good from hour 1, but gets better as you acclimate to how everything works
@@jimjarsmanksyou obviously didn’t watch the video
I've played for 14 hours and what do you mean by "good". I was enjoying myself from the first moment I left the mine and started combat. Sure the pacing is still slow, but once I had the ship and landed on New Atlantis I just did what I wanted. I eventually went back into the main quest but I was doing some side questing and traveling separately. Now after 14 hours I already have the Mantis ship because the first ship is crappy for space combat.
@@hengineerI've been doing side missions aswell and have been enjoying the game
@@jimjarsmanks Glad you’re enjoying it but I’m bored to death. At least it was free on game pass. I’d have been pissed if I payed for it.
As a kid, I fell in love with the few open-world titles that were available at the time. I'd get infinitely excited when immersing myself in these worlds, thinking of all the potential and untapped potential. We no longer have the limitations we had back then, and i've yet to see any progress. As a great man once said, "good graphics are the just the sprinkles on the cupcake".
"Great man" xDDDDDDD
Yeah) More like "The Bald man")
The graphics are sub-par, anyways.
I genuinely reckon they are using Starfield as Vapor-ware to see if people will buy into a decade old style of game - with little to no effort sprinkled in.
I’m confident they don’t want ES6 to have this kind of divisive community opinion.
So they’ll legit knee cap an entirely new IP to Tee-up ES6.
Can completely agree with you here. I thought that maybe it was just because I'd grown up and no longer had that big imagination I once had. There are still a few games though that give you that same feeling, Baldurs Gate 3 is providing that similar feeling right for me right now tbf. - Love the quote at the end of your comment - He really is a great man 😂
While it hasnt been open world games ive loved, I loved a lot of genres, and sadly this is true for so many things. The release of Sons of the Forest for example, its the same as the original The Forest, but with a bad NPC companion, tedious and straighr up buggy/unfinished features.
And that is excused, somehow. Even in that terrible state it got so much love from people, I dont know why. We need some actual good releases instead of the same games or new games in bad states.
@@Wataheadable weird to me the graphics easy come out on top of cyberpunk, they just sorta feel better than average for the last couple of years of games
The planet exploration feels like no mans sky on release
Ouch
The more I look at Charles, the more I'm thinking he's a brother of Keanu Reeves
Any time you hear a game studio saying they're going to make procedurally generated world in a 3D environment... RUN! It's always going to be a barren and empty world to explore.
It's really overrated.. It's either every planets somehow are full of structures and aliens like No man sky or a whole bunch of emptiness if games' being a bit realistic at all.
Minecraft the only game that’s done this right
Thats not even true minecraft is great, but yeah that's not gonna work for a story game
I mean, they did say that the PG planets would be barren but full of resources and stuff. And all planets with life on them are not procedurally generated, the only ones that are PG are the ones labeled “Barren” I’m pretty sure. And there’s a lot of “Barren” planets and “Rock” planets with zero life on them, but tons of resources. Those planets are meant for dungeons, looting, resources, and outpost potential. The 100 planets that have life and tons of quests to do are clearly better than the PG planets as the ones with life are hand-crafted (mostly). I just think the vast majority of complaints about this game are about insignificant issues that Bethesda never tried to oversell in the first place. They were outright about the fact that most of the planets would be barren, procedurally generated resource/dungeon hotspots. This game had a good story, compelling and actually has some pretty significant consequences to certain decisions, something Bethesda lacked in Fallout 4. They didn’t oversell this game. They sold it as “another same old bethesda game” and what we got was another same old bethesda game. The complaints are just because if it’s a video game, no matter how good the game may be or how little the devs lied or oversold it, there’ll be some gamers who call it a flop all because you can’t get 1000 deeply detailed planets. We get 100 deeply detailed planets which is already more than astounding. The other 900 are lovely resource/loot farms. Classic bethesda fashion. They sold it like that too. A game studio can’t make an entire galaxy of detail in only 7 years. If they tried to detail every single planet, they’d likely take two goddamn decades.
@@kipthebunbun fr tho the random planet landing is just a small part of the game, that can be completely ignored yet for some reason is ruining the game?
I think it's important to have opinions like this. Rarely do we hear if a reviewer actually finished a game, and if they did finish it, how much they wanted to (or not to) finish the game or play beyond its endpoint. Most reviewers play games because it's an assignment for them and their writing reflects that. I know Charlie does it for content & views but it does seem like he genuinely wants to try to explore the new and fresh things in games, movies, and other pop culture.
I'm really trying to figure out what game Charles played?....
Because Starfield is Perfection!
@@BlueBARv5ye what did "CHARLES" play also stop defending this half baked games yall eat up whatever the devs throw at you even if it pebbles
aint no way you call this pile of shit perfection@@BlueBARv5
“Everyone says the game gets good after 12 hours.”
I’m so fucking sorry. If I have to wait a half a day for the game to get good, it’s not a good game. Imagine if a 16 or 20 episode TV show came out, a full hour per episode, and people said “after episode 12 it really picks up. It gets so good.”
The show would be canned. It’d be left on the side of the road with its wallet gone. I’ve sung enough praise for Baldur’s Gate 3 lately, but here’s a bit more: BG3 pretty instantly hooks you.
Starts out “well I’ve gotta get this parasite out of my head” and the story grows from there. By the first hour, it had players hooked. Which is what a game is supposed to do.
Playing Starfield let me enjoy the current state of No Man Sky even more