Great vid, sub earned. Bethesda has been my favorite studio since oblivion was released, i was 8 years old (turning 27 this September) naturally i was excited for Starfield and naturally i was disappointed. My hopes for ES6 are lower and lower but i have high hopes. On the other hand, just started BG3 last week and i can not stop playing whenever i have a chance, such a fun game once you get into it and get used to the controls (playing on pc)
I feel like i barely played it, not even finishing it once yet my counter is almost 400 hours. In comparison, i refunded Starfield in early access after 20 hours.
But the top down view and the turn base gameplay sucks...how hard would have been to make it first and third person....I hate the game...much rather play starfield
I downloaded Starfield, played through the first mission, landed on the next planet, and haven't touched it since. I have 200 hrs in BG3. Bethesda needs to figure out how to quit cloning themselves and make something fresh.
I am a huge fan of Skyrim and Fallout 3 and 4. I have an embarrassing number of hours in Skyrim and 328 hours in BG3(that includes all the years in early access), but I stopped playing Starfield after 8 hours. Life is too short to be that bored. I really hope they regroup and knock ES6 out of the park.
Bethesda got so used that ppl buy sloppy games, that they became sloppy themselves. Just listen to what the chief story writer of Bethesda says about stories in games .... it it revealing.
Starfield feels empty although it's an FPS /TPS game and should be much more immersive. On the other hand, BG3, which is played with an isometric/top-down view most of the time, keeps the immersion on the top level and always makes you curious about what'll come next. I am really happy that Larian Studios showed everyone that even a CRPG, which is a pretty niche genre imho, can be a huge success and enjoyed by a broad audience. Thanks for the video!
I think you can see the difference of these games even from the main menu. I feel that music is very important for an epic story, movies or games. And you kind of feel that even from the menu or trailers from games like Skyrim or Fallout4 and more to our subject BG3. But Starfield is so bland in that department that when comparing them all you can see which will be good or not even without having to play them at all.
10:00 - The Bethesda story element is a complex one. If you take Skyrim or Fallout 4 into consideration: The main story isn't amazing, which helps it to be secondary to a more compelling exploration game loop. That exploration, if enjoyed for extended periods of time, threatens to sever one's connection to the plot, causing tension between story and exploration. BG3 has exploration, sure, but not nearly to the extent that something like Skyrim does. Skyrim has massively more "square footage" so to speak, which is what players assume would suffer if more resources were poured into crafting a more narrative experience. Anyone that likes survival games knows the trade off here, I think. Survival games usually have the weakest of narratives, lest it get in the way of an endless craft, grind, gather, explore experience. As a side note, one thing that all of these games do better than Bethesda is something that would be relatively cheaply implemented and that's the "bait and switch quest." Quests in games are almost always fetch quests or murder contracts, so what the aforementioned games do is craft their quests such that they NEVER go as planned. "I need you to go kill rats." -> In a Bethesda game, you'll just kill some rats and get paid. In these other games, you'll go to kill the rats, but find out that there's a wizard creating mutant rats, causing you to have to find his secret hideout and kil- wait, you can't kill him, he's being mind controlled by a miniature space badger. Will you kill him or sever his connection to the space badger? Already you've taken a standard "rat contract" and added nuance. That quest can even be a dead end and it's still going to be more memorable and enjoyable because expectations were subverted in a good way.
Just weak excuses for the fact, that the Starfiled writing is bad. What argument shall that be "it is not so bad, because B. writing was never complex" Huh? Many words, no content -- your whole text reads like Bethesda games are: Wide and huge, with no real content -- JUST huge masses of NOTHING.
@@What_do_I_Think Oh Starfield is terrible. I don't care about Starfield. I just type fast and had some thoughts about why no one expects good writing from them and why a few wouldn't want them to try.
I played through BG3 doing as much as I possibly could. In the end I was glad it was over. I had to stop playing starfield after 100 hours because my save system broke. It's fixed now and just the shipbuilding and fighting with the ship... To me is more fun than anything in bg3. I wanted to delay finishing this game because it's so much fun. Where in bg3 I was just glad it was over. It did have a great ending and epilogue though.
Literally the worst video I have seen. Comparing Starfield to a space sim which mind you Elite Dangerous is filled with empty and I mean empty planets that are all procedural generated and empty space. And then only using the story elements of bg3 vs Starfield. You know what can be done in Starfield that is not possible in bg3? I can walk off the beaten path since Starfield is not a liner like bg3. I can role play any character I want, you can completely ignore the main story line, join multiple factions, make your own story for your character since you are not locked into the story like bg3. Starfield also has action based combat, ship building, base build, weapon customization, armor customization, and land vehicles. Baldurs gate has none of this all. What bg3 does well is the story which is very good. But lets be honest here both game starch a different itch. Compare only what bg3 does well to Starfield while ignoring everything else that makes Bethesda games and Starfield special is disingenuous. This is like me saying bg3 sucks because you cant ignore the main story or you cant do action combat.
Also, "delveopers" have nothing to do with how the game ends up. There are dedicated game designers, game design executives, story excecutives etc that are the guys "to blame" for the shit. regular developers (coders) have next to no influence on game systems, story, character arcs etc.
Did you recently open your eyes? Some people even can not see with open eyes! Just telling stupid things like you did, makes them not true -- they stay stupid! BG3 delivered and over-delivered, Starfiled is a MESS! But I guess you blame the many millions in marketing that B. wasted on it, that it was "under appreciated" (what is complete BS!)
@@What_do_I_Think hilarious when the sheep get mad at someone for not following the herd. Yes, your precious Baldurs Gate 3 is overrated. It's ok to admit it. It's not a bad game but it didn't live up to the hype. Just like Starfield wasn't as bad as everyone made it out to be. Of course, I wouldn't expect you to have an opinion of your own. You think independent thought is stupid. That is expected from a child's mind.
@@jibantik00 Repeating stupid blah, does not make it true. And insulting people neither -- NO it is just a sign of a person, that is not grown up: YOU! *Plonk*
@@jibantik00 I came into BG3 without any expectations and I was blown away. So many choices and consequences. So many ways you can tackle quests. It's a true RPG. Something bethesda can never make
I don't think my opinion really matters but......I think starfield is a much better game...the isometric top down view kills balders gate for me...the turn base fighting is the worst I've seen...even though starfield is a 7/10...balders gate is a 1/10....the trailer is such a misrepresentation of what the game actually is it's almost a crime...so let it be said I will definitely not be playing balders gate 3...
I normally dislike turned based games but this one was diffrent to say its the worst without even trying it is wild.. i guess if thinking is to hard this game isnt for you
the whole point of bg3 combat is to make you think about your next moves and to strategize. what i love about it is that you can turn an important boss into a sheep and shove them into the void instantly winning if you want to. you CAN do that. you can say turn based rpg's aren't for you, but to say its the worst ever is objectively wrong. starfield is all samey, bland, uninspired.
You can say, that you like X better because of ... but when you start your argument with "I don't like it and that means it is not good" --- than you disqualify your own "judgement". AND NO, your opinion does not matter -- because of that reason.
You like Starfield's style more, but that does not make it a much better game. In fact, in any objective factor, BG3 is way superior, and in most subjective factors, it also is. What someone likes is not equal to what is good. I love Fast and Furious movies, but I would never say they are more than a 6/10 just because I like them; I can separate things.
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video Part 2!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JpT5Voak6WA/mqdefault.jpg)
Great vid, sub earned. Bethesda has been my favorite studio since oblivion was released, i was 8 years old (turning 27 this September) naturally i was excited for Starfield and naturally i was disappointed. My hopes for ES6 are lower and lower but i have high hopes. On the other hand, just started BG3 last week and i can not stop playing whenever i have a chance, such a fun game once you get into it and get used to the controls (playing on pc)
After a 200 hours of BG3 and the game still shock me with the details and how much love they put in this legendary game
I feel like i barely played it, not even finishing it once yet my counter is almost 400 hours. In comparison, i refunded Starfield in early access after 20 hours.
But the top down view and the turn base gameplay sucks...how hard would have been to make it first and third person....I hate the game...much rather play starfield
Bethesda's writing keeps the skip button busy while Larian's writing is enjoyable.
I downloaded Starfield, played through the first mission, landed on the next planet, and haven't touched it since.
I have 200 hrs in BG3.
Bethesda needs to figure out how to quit cloning themselves and make something fresh.
I played Starfield right before Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty. It was a similarly tough comparison.
I am a huge fan of Skyrim and Fallout 3 and 4. I have an embarrassing number of hours in Skyrim and 328 hours in BG3(that includes all the years in early access), but I stopped playing
Starfield after 8 hours. Life is too short to be that bored. I really hope they regroup and knock ES6 out of the park.
Bethesda got so used that ppl buy sloppy games, that they became sloppy themselves. Just listen to what the chief story writer of Bethesda says about stories in games .... it it revealing.
Starfield feels empty although it's an FPS /TPS game and should be much more immersive. On the other hand, BG3, which is played with an isometric/top-down view most of the time, keeps the immersion on the top level and always makes you curious about what'll come next. I am really happy that Larian Studios showed everyone that even a CRPG, which is a pretty niche genre imho, can be a huge success and enjoyed by a broad audience.
Thanks for the video!
Bethesda just is not a good developer anymore. They promise and don't deliver again and again.
only issue with BG3 is camera controls IMHO
Starfield is so incredible soulless they must have gone out of their way to washed game until everything was just meh
I was gutted I was unable to play starfield at first having no Xbox but that timed baldurs gate exclusive was a great salve
I think you can see the difference of these games even from the main menu. I feel that music is very important for an epic story, movies or games. And you kind of feel that even from the menu or trailers from games like Skyrim or Fallout4 and more to our subject BG3. But Starfield is so bland in that department that when comparing them all you can see which will be good or not even without having to play them at all.
10:00 - The Bethesda story element is a complex one. If you take Skyrim or Fallout 4 into consideration: The main story isn't amazing, which helps it to be secondary to a more compelling exploration game loop. That exploration, if enjoyed for extended periods of time, threatens to sever one's connection to the plot, causing tension between story and exploration. BG3 has exploration, sure, but not nearly to the extent that something like Skyrim does. Skyrim has massively more "square footage" so to speak, which is what players assume would suffer if more resources were poured into crafting a more narrative experience.
Anyone that likes survival games knows the trade off here, I think. Survival games usually have the weakest of narratives, lest it get in the way of an endless craft, grind, gather, explore experience.
As a side note, one thing that all of these games do better than Bethesda is something that would be relatively cheaply implemented and that's the "bait and switch quest." Quests in games are almost always fetch quests or murder contracts, so what the aforementioned games do is craft their quests such that they NEVER go as planned. "I need you to go kill rats." -> In a Bethesda game, you'll just kill some rats and get paid. In these other games, you'll go to kill the rats, but find out that there's a wizard creating mutant rats, causing you to have to find his secret hideout and kil- wait, you can't kill him, he's being mind controlled by a miniature space badger. Will you kill him or sever his connection to the space badger? Already you've taken a standard "rat contract" and added nuance. That quest can even be a dead end and it's still going to be more memorable and enjoyable because expectations were subverted in a good way.
Just weak excuses for the fact, that the Starfiled writing is bad.
What argument shall that be "it is not so bad, because B. writing was never complex" Huh?
Many words, no content -- your whole text reads like Bethesda games are: Wide and huge, with no real content -- JUST huge masses of NOTHING.
@@What_do_I_Think Oh Starfield is terrible. I don't care about Starfield. I just type fast and had some thoughts about why no one expects good writing from them and why a few wouldn't want them to try.
I played through BG3 doing as much as I possibly could. In the end I was glad it was over.
I had to stop playing starfield after 100 hours because my save system broke. It's fixed now and just the shipbuilding and fighting with the ship... To me is more fun than anything in bg3. I wanted to delay finishing this game because it's so much fun. Where in bg3 I was just glad it was over. It did have a great ending and epilogue though.
Literally the worst video I have seen. Comparing Starfield to a space sim which mind you Elite Dangerous is filled with empty and I mean empty planets that are all procedural generated and empty space. And then only using the story elements of bg3 vs Starfield. You know what can be done in Starfield that is not possible in bg3? I can walk off the beaten path since Starfield is not a liner like bg3. I can role play any character I want, you can completely ignore the main story line, join multiple factions, make your own story for your character since you are not locked into the story like bg3. Starfield also has action based combat, ship building, base build, weapon customization, armor customization, and land vehicles. Baldurs gate has none of this all. What bg3 does well is the story which is very good. But lets be honest here both game starch a different itch. Compare only what bg3 does well to Starfield while ignoring everything else that makes Bethesda games and Starfield special is disingenuous. This is like me saying bg3 sucks because you cant ignore the main story or you cant do action combat.
Also, "delveopers" have nothing to do with how the game ends up. There are dedicated game designers, game design executives, story excecutives etc that are the guys "to blame" for the shit. regular developers (coders) have next to no influence on game systems, story, character arcs etc.
More hyperbolic nonsense. Currently playing and having fun with Starfield.
BG3 was overhyped. Starfield was under appreciated. Both were ok. BG3 did not live up to the franchise. Starfield was what I expected from Bethesda.
Did you recently open your eyes? Some people even can not see with open eyes!
Just telling stupid things like you did, makes them not true -- they stay stupid!
BG3 delivered and over-delivered, Starfiled is a MESS!
But I guess you blame the many millions in marketing that B. wasted on it, that it was "under appreciated" (what is complete BS!)
@@What_do_I_Think hilarious when the sheep get mad at someone for not following the herd. Yes, your precious Baldurs Gate 3 is overrated. It's ok to admit it. It's not a bad game but it didn't live up to the hype. Just like Starfield wasn't as bad as everyone made it out to be. Of course, I wouldn't expect you to have an opinion of your own. You think independent thought is stupid. That is expected from a child's mind.
@@jibantik00 Repeating stupid blah, does not make it true. And insulting people neither -- NO it is just a sign of a person, that is not grown up: YOU!
*Plonk*
@@What_do_I_Think ironic. Try reading your first response and then your second. You'll see what I mean
@@jibantik00 I came into BG3 without any expectations and I was blown away. So many choices and consequences. So many ways you can tackle quests. It's a true RPG. Something bethesda can never make
I don't think my opinion really matters but......I think starfield is a much better game...the isometric top down view kills balders gate for me...the turn base fighting is the worst I've seen...even though starfield is a 7/10...balders gate is a 1/10....the trailer is such a misrepresentation of what the game actually is it's almost a crime...so let it be said I will definitely not be playing balders gate 3...
Lmaooo this comparison and reasoning goes craaaaazy
I normally dislike turned based games but this one was diffrent to say its the worst without even trying it is wild.. i guess if thinking is to hard this game isnt for you
the whole point of bg3 combat is to make you think about your next moves and to strategize. what i love about it is that you can turn an important boss into a sheep and shove them into the void instantly winning if you want to. you CAN do that. you can say turn based rpg's aren't for you, but to say its the worst ever is objectively wrong. starfield is all samey, bland, uninspired.
You can say, that you like X better because of ... but when you start your argument with "I don't like it and that means it is not good" --- than you disqualify your own "judgement".
AND NO, your opinion does not matter -- because of that reason.
You like Starfield's style more, but that does not make it a much better game. In fact, in any objective factor, BG3 is way superior, and in most subjective factors, it also is. What someone likes is not equal to what is good. I love Fast and Furious movies, but I would never say they are more than a 6/10 just because I like them; I can separate things.