2007* Ofc its not that bad but come on, there are games that are literally 10 years older that are looking way better and even better optimised. The “next gen technology” is obviously a lazy excuse for not optimisiging the game what it feels like at all.
@@SuperGirl-tf2wn what like redfall and fallout 76? 🤔🤣 Starfield isn't the norm for Bethesda anymore. It's also unusual that it's gotten so much hype and praise. I'm not saying I hate bethsoft. I loved morrowind, point lookout, and the shivering isles. But a game studio is made up of its developers, and as devs are removed and replaced, it becomes Theseus' ship. It's senior leadership is to blame for that. Bethesda isn't the same Bethesda.
@@kaarekleven3341 A new engine while good is still never going to fix the cancer that is todd howard and the team half assing everything to rely on modders because starfield problem is that there's nothing interesting to do, fallout 76 is a mess but at least there was something interesting to do (even if few)
Starfield can be summarized by this sequence: fly (load) into a planet, walk for ten minutes, get to an NPC, have them say "hmm yes, interesting, you should go talk to X on another planet", turning around, and going back to where you come from to repeat the sequence. Starfield is the game that could have been an email.
The quests are literally forcing players to use fast travel all the time. 70% fast travel 10% walking and the rest boring dialogue with some uninteresting npcs
@@thedoomslayer5863 the exploration not that there’s much variation , wandering around on small planets to steal some ships. doing some quests to see if there where any outstanding ones. 200 hours was a real long time I am still thinking how do I got there lmfao
The loading screens are the most surprising part of Starfield. They improved so much between Skyrim and Fallout 4, with the latter having quite a few buildings you could go in without a loading screen. How did they take such a step back?
@yazmeliayzol624 There's a difference between needing some loading screens and needing ones to go to a galaxy, go to a planet, leave your ship, board your ship, use an elevator, enter a building, exit a building, traveling just to get to different spots in one of the main cities, etc. It's obnoxious and they need to get a new engine. The reason they need immersion breaking amount of loading screens is because they've been scraping by with a nearly 15yo game engine.
@yazmeliayzol624 No, it absolutely should not have been entirely expected when the game was touted as a "next gen PC game" and the ridiculous system requirements were justified by that. It's pretty fair to expect "next gen games" to be better in pretty much every measurable way than the ones that came before, not worse.
@yazmeliayzol624 Who said I'm disappointed? I just said 6 trillion loading screens should not be expected in a "next gen game". I was personally not fooled into handing Bethesda money for this excuse of a game nor was I under the illusion that the game would be any better.
@yazmeliayzol624 Actually, a PC fangirl (the newest console I own is a PS 3), but I don't need to have played the game, when I can see the screens in all the streams I've seen. So, I guess if you call video evidence anecdotal, then yes.
The writing is also lacking in the small details. For example, they wanted a monster whose name sounds scary and also sounds a bit like xenomorph. So they called it "terrormorph". It sounds like a first-draft placeholder that they never got around to changing.
It’s like how in Borderlands 2 there’s a side quest to rename “Bullymongs” into something more unique but it spirals down to a point where Hammerlock calls them “Bonerfarts” even that name is more creative than merely “Terrormorph”
It'd be cool if the terrormorph was originally like a biological method of terraforming a planet, which then got way out of hand, hence the name. But aint nobody got time for that.
They also tried really hard not to offend anyone, so -- like yamiks said -- everything had to be named, conversed about, and handled with kid gloves to the point of being pointless.
8:10 I noticed something. Whenever a publisher or developer says "We focused on X to make the gameplay more interesting" it means they never even considered Y and could not make Z work so they gave up.
I like starfield for like 80 hours, then i tried baldurs gate. I havent opened starfield since and one of the first things i noticed when i spoke to a dog in BG3 was that even the animals had better facial expressions than the NPC characters in starfield.
Baldurs Gate 3 is a fucking masterpiece. No other release this year even comes close. The depth of the characters, the narrative driven story elements, the nearly flawless implementation of the RPG style combined with the dice roll system that always makes every playthrough interesting... Its definitely one of the best games of the modern age.
I did the same but with Cyberpunk 2077, 100+ hours in Starfield and I feel dirty to expend so much time there, Cyberpunk is incredible in almost every way, the dialog alone is incredible. Starfield is mediocre at best 6/10 for me.
I had so much fun scanning the same plant 🌱 five times before the scan was complete that I uninstalled the entire game and started playing Red Dead Redemption 1 instead as it’s also on game pass. What a glorious gaming experience that is compared to Starfield even if it’s 13 years older.
yeah.. i didnt even bother making comparisons to rockstar games and how much more "alive" their open world feel I'd feel like punching down.. even with something like GTA3
@@Lizards_Lounge100% agreed. Have no clue why RDR2 gets raved about so much when the original is far more fun to actually play. RDR2 is a technical and artistic masterpiece without a doubt but games are meant to be fun and that one puts me to sleep. RDR1 however i couldnt put the controller down and UN pushed it to even higher levels of badass.
At 160 hours in, I’m done with it. One of the most infuriating aspects I noticed was the corner cutting they did with the extensive use if copy paste cells. If you’ve been to one abandoned mine, military base, research base, and so on, you’ve seen them all, right down to the same loot in the same place, even the NPCs are in exactly the same place. First time I ran into it I thought I’d already been to that particular site.
@@JakeLondonRiversI hate this way of thinking. You can spend a lot of time in something and still dislike it. That's typically how reviews are done, otherwise you'd have fanboys saying, "you only spent 30 hours and didn't even give it a chance". There are people with hundreds of hours in Skyrim who'd say it's "unplayable boring trash" without mods of any sort.
That's because you're an intelligent human being who has standards. Also being able to remember how Bethesda handled the last game they made also helps.
@@aries4378fuck you he's a Sony pony also a nintendtone who hates Xbox and gaming! Starfield is the best thing since halo infinite where hundreds still play it! I'm joking and apologize now for acting like an xbot. I thought about getting it but I waited for angry Joe btw great video of his.
The marketing made me want to buy it even less. "Twin games" are scummy, especially in cases like this or Dead Space. Despite what Todd says, this was just a reaction to Outer Worlds, which in turn was a reaction to Obsidian not being allowed to make another Fallout. The Dead Space remake was just a reaction to Callisto Protocol, which itself was just a reaction to Dead Space 4 not being green-lit and the studio being canned.
The constant loading screens did it for me,, the sheer never ending number of them for what feels like every single action made me close the game and uninstall. They used SSDs as a crutch
@@TheSocketshock Mine were taking that long until I cleared all my old saves except for one and started NG+, I think it was my house with thousands of decorations in it... thanks Todd.
Same! After 50 hrs of loading screens i dropped the game and uninstalled as well! I couldnt take it anymore. Id start falling asleep after playing for 30-45 mins
Make sure to give the game an honest review, we need to voice our dissatisfaction where microsoft and bethesda get the info. We know theyre not learning from what we say on youtube. 🤦♂️
As a writer myself, I'll give my opinion (TED talk) regarding Starfield's story (bad) and Cyberpunk 2077 (great). First: Starfield has trash motivation Consider Bethesda's other recent games, Fallout 4 and Skyrim. What was the inciting action for both of these games? In Fallout 4, after escaping to the vault, your child is kidnapped and your spouse murdered by random people. When you thaw from cryo sleep, your goal is clear: find my kid. In Skyrim, as your head is placed on a chopping block, a dragon that might as well be Satan himself, swoops down and destroys the village you're in. After you escape, you learn that dragons are not normally around Skyrim, so you have one goal: figuring out wtf just happened and why are dragons appearing. Meanwhile, in Starfield, you grab a mcguffin. Then a guy just randomly gives you, the mcguffin toucher, the keys to his space ship, and tells you to go to his club. You make it there to learn about the mcguffin, and all they have to say is: we don't know what the mcguffin is, we just want to find more... engaging, I know. Where a game like Cyberpunk stands out as a fantastic story is this: first, you pick a background that has you complete a short mission where you meet your bestie. Then, time passes and your bestie has a big job in mind that will make you rich and famous. You come up with a perfect plan, carry it out, then unexpected sh*t hits the fan, turning everything after into a complete clusterf*** where you narrowly escape, only to be shot in the head and wake up later to learn that the long dead remnant of an edgy punk rock terrorist is in your brain, while you're told you are slowly dying and must find a way to survive. Not only do they give you a believeable motivation, but they serve it up to you with a helping of memorable backstory that helps you learn who your character is, what their relationship is like with the world around them, and a cinematic action sequence to really emphasize the high stakes game you're playing. Second: Starfield's world is fake and it shows. Starfield's world is pathetic. It is unbelieveable in many ways. First off, every random person feels the need to tell you random bs you don't care about. Like honestly, have you ever been walking down the street and some random guy goes: don't you hate it when you make a sandwich upside down? It might be funny the first time you hear it, but when it's repeated by twelve different voices one hundred times, it sucks! Like, just shut the f*** up! No, you wouldn't have killed me random pirate if I didn't join the fleet! I'd have caved your skull in and used it to drink canuck maple syrup soda out of! Meanwhile, Cyberpunk npcs only randomly address you if they have a reason to, like threaten you to get away, otherwise they'll attack you. You know, a bit more realistic. The former breaks immersion regularly, while the latter aids it. However, that might be a nitpick compared to the other things. One thing that is clear is the way people talk in Starfield. They talk exactly the way you and I would. They don't use any slang we don't use, and any references that come close to showing its world are weird space references, i.e. sea shanties being sung with new atlantas in them. It's almost like everyone forgot about Earth and what happened there (and even that scenario is completely unrealistic considering Mars took billions of years to lose its atmosphere to what it is today. But apparently Earth could lose it in a few decades). Basically, the world has no history short of the recent colony war. Even on that end, the factions are pretty much the same. The only real difference is that one is just cowboy and the other police. Otherwise, they all speak the same language, they all do the same things, they seem to have the same values, etc. Meanwhile, in Cyberpunk 2077, each gang has a unique appearance, culture, and lore. The world itself uses slang and references we don't, that make sense, as in, there us a clear reasoning behind them that you can see language evolving into: Eddies from Euro Dollars, or the shorthand ED; Preem from premium; klept, from kleptomania, the condition where a person steals on impulse; or choom, which could be chum but spoken phonetically in spanish. Even words like gonk or nova just make sense in their context. Plus, these are memorable. Meanwhile, the only thing I remember from Starfield is dust, as in, I'll dust your ship. The world itself, the way it appears, makes sense. For example, why does a spacefaring superpower have a capital city with roads made of mud and feces? In Cyberpunk, the parts of the cities with said roads are where you'll also be able to throw a bag of crack attached to a rope over a bridge and be able to pull up a junky like you're fishing. But, the areas with the powers that be, are clean and have a real sense of order. The billboards showcase weird, dystopian, things like "real water" or "%70 real meat, meat." The news casts talk about things like the discovery of animals thought to be extinct like the western cotton tail. Meanwhile the ads in starfield are boring, and the newscasts about stuff you did. In short, the world of Cyberpunk feels unique and like it goes far beyond the bounds of the game, while in Starfield, it revolves around you and feels just normal, but in space. Third, and last since this comment is already a small novel, the characters. Oh my freaking Lord, are the characters in Starfield BORING. The first thing I felt when I met Barret was: this guys gonna be Bethesda's Jar Jar Binx, isn't he. Then, my first mission with Vasco was just me pistol whipping him nonstop for saying pointless, stupid things every ten seconds. The characters lack depth, substance, and just feel... well... like NPCs. You can literally understand most of their life by interrogating them for ten seconds and nothing more builds onto them after that, unless they're romanceable. Even after that, it's pretty shallow. Meanwhile, in Cyberpunk 2077, the characters don't talk unless they are talking TO you in a conversation. No stupid quips, no stupid random I'm-so-unique dialogue. Then, slowly, and naturally, characters will open up to you as you interact with them in a way that shows them you can be trusted. Judy doesn't tell you about her childhood town until you do quests for her and show her you have her back. There's no "noname liked that" or "noname disliked that" bs because you shared your opinion on space lsd. It's just you and a character talking and getting to know one another, or butting heads. I guess I could also say the dialogue options in Cyberpunk 2077 don't read like they're from a preschool text book. It's clear the writers went to great lenghts to consider the possible options your character could use to respond, and made them sound as realistically as possible. In Starfield, why can't I choose to use both the microbe and the Aceles for handling terrormorphs? They both have their pros and cons that complement each other, not oppose each other. Why can't I fish an answer like that out? Meanwhile, Starfield npc responses sound like someone who's pretentious, someone who believes they're smarther than they really are. Meanwhile, in Cyberpunk, they sound... well... like real people. To summarize everything, Cyberpunk is a game that feel like the writers wanted to tell a story for every mission. They had a vision, a goal, and ultimately, the game could have been set in any number of time periods and settings and still had the impact it did. Meanwhile, Starfield just seemed focused on... how cool is space, while everything else was an afterthought. It seems like there was no planning; no end goal for a story. Tod Howard himself said that during an entire game's development, it's only about in the last year that Bethesda begins to really figure out what kind of game they're making. They have no clue what they're doing because they don't know where they want to go. It's why everything from gameplay to the story seem like a confused mess because Bethesda had no idea what they were making until it was almost done. Thank you for listening to my TED talk.
hell im not a writer and often about 90% of the shit goes over my head.. BUT when a game has such BAD story and writing that EVEN I engage my brain to analyze WHY it's bad : you've fucked up hard!
"In short, the world of Cyberpunk feels unique and like it goes far beyond the bounds of the game" Thats because it does go far beyond. Aint defending Starfield here (haven't played it yet, but boy does it feel boring af even after like 2 lines of dialogue from some video, really just at a glance), but Cyberpunk does have an advantage of like 30+ years of lore development prior to the game even being concieved. Not to diminish it's writing which gets damn stellar at times, or dev's hard work of sticking to the source material and not retconing stuff left n right cause they kNoWbEtTeR. Just all in all good and respectfull job they've done in lore department.
I think this is a case of them setting the game after all the interesting bits already happened. Game would have been far more interesting if it was set during the colony war tbh.
Even the camera mode draws a sharp contrast between the two games. In cyberpunk you have like a hundred different poses, some of them anime references and literal power ranger poses along with about every mood imaginable. Starfield? There's like 10? Only one has any personality, and as a result is the ONLY one people use for EVERY thumbnail. (Arms spread open pose)
The biggest problem I have is none of the dialog choices reflect anything someone with even a room temperature IQ would say. The responses tend to be outright stupid or shows a lack of what the player has already learned. "Terramophs, what are those?" - Actual dialog option after completing the UC storyline and becoming head of the TDM (or whatever the hell it's called). I've slaughtered more than a hundred of these things already, what are you doing having an option for "WhAt'S a TeRrAmOrPh?". As Critical Drinker would say, "fuck off, game."
Vehicles would only highlight just how small (and yet somehow barren/devoid of interest) these procedurally-generated planets truly are. What a galactic disappointment...
@@Falicon Maybe. If you mean the pronouns, I barely even noticed it. I wonder it the guy that ranted about it was upset when you could have a dick _and_ tits in Cyberpunk, though.
Funny you mention the Skeleton found in the river in Skyrim, this is part of a Quest where you must find Narfi's sister, Raeda. There is a 4hr15 RUclips video about this very murder mystery that was made just a few weeks ago, 12 years after the release of Skyrim. Name one mission from Starfield that anyone will be making 4hr videos about in 12 years?
@@scifrygaming I never expressed that point of view anywhere. You are literally pulling that out of thin air lol I was simply laughing at the fact that you and many got bamboozled by this dogshit game 😆
BGS fans don't deserve good games because they'll always make excuses for Bethesda instead of holding the studio accountable for its laziness. So the studio can be written off as a net loss, and I'm 90% certain that I'll never bother purchasing another BGS game for the rest of my life.
imagine how cool it be if they had dismemberment and seeing limbs float around after a battle in space or coming across an abandoned ship slowly discovering floating body parts
@@Narangarath Fallout 3/4 already had dismemberment (even Skyrim had decapitation), and Starfield's engine handles large numbers of zero-g objects extraordinarily well. It definitely could have been done. I suspect the omission was down to either a lack of imagination, or more likely imo the fact that the devs weren't allowed to add any more features in the last year of development (which is generally when devs add in the coolest little touches) in favour of polishing/making sure the game doesn't crash all the time.
@@rioplats True, but I couldn't even begin to count the times I've seen dismembered bits not behaving properly (in various ways ) in Fallout games. I can just imagine how meme worthy all that would be in zero G, but I guess they could have performed a miracle this time.
If only Bethesda actually planned anything they would've realized that the engine needed some foundational reworks to actually work with the game they wanted to make
Hey, the 10/10 reviews are super useful. It is great to know which exact reviewers should be permanently put in the "knows next to nothing so their entire outlet becomes a freakin' joke" pile. It's so useful that the minute one of these people get a new job, it instantly invalidates their new company.
You have to wonder how many of those early 10/10 reviews were bought. Because they came out very quickly and there's no way the reviewers could have played much of the game.
@@cdeford2 I mean, sure that's an interesting question, but at the end of the day does taking a bribe make them better or worse at their job, here? I reckon actually thinking their 10/10 review was legit is much worse, because they'd be like a violin player who couldn't tell the difference between a 6 year old's first recital and an international soloist.
Yeah, I was so hyped for Starfield. Played it the second it was available. Forced myself to sink 50 hours into it. Took a break to play Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty and holy shit, the difference is night and day. Immediately immersed in a world, having a blast, no loading screens, graphics, gameplay, progression, audio, literally better in every measurable way. Starfield just makes me sad now for what it could have been. You made so many good points and really summarized my experience with it
Yeah, cyberpunk 2077 really spoiled me. All of the cities in starfield put together are like a single city block of Night City. And there's nothing to really do in any of them. If you took cyberpunk and merged it with Elite Dangerous, you'd have a masterpiece.
Same.. bought cyberpunk when 2 was released and resent starfield because it's so awfully average. Have not touched starfield since but have played punk constantly.. The stories are amazing
@@Yeebok So let me get this straight, you bought cyberpunk at launch and you resent starfield? Man are your priorities screwed. Cyberpunk didn't work. Nothing they promised was delivered. The game was so bad and unplayable PS removed it from the store and offered refunds. But you resent starfield. Yeah yall some liars who love bandwagons. Anybody and everybody who bought the DLC for Cyberpunk are complete idiots. Project Red lied at every turn. And it took 3 years and a multimillion dollar lawsuit for them to get it right
Building ships is or rather was my favorite part of the game Until you realize that there is no point in ship building because all you get for space ships is random encounters and loading screens for loading screens
Todd is a monster. It just hit me, all the dialogue is framed like Todd's conference shots, all (almost all) animations during convos are Todd's fake almost-smile (very punchable) with brow action and occasional arm movement, Todd's tone is also prevalent in the dialogues: stoic to the point of being eerie. Todd, why are you so narcissistic?! It's far fetched but I imagine working at Bethesda is a nightmare where uncle Todd is strolling about and showing you "hows't done". Like an attention predator and control freak with almost no emotion on his face.
Thinking .... If Bethesda produced a simple game that solely entailed punching Todd in the face (maybe throw in gut punches and crotch kicks for variety), that'd probably be a big winner.
Just can't believe this was praised as the Elite and Star-Citizen killer. Despite the fact that ED manages just fine killing itself and SC never being alive to begin with this sound soo stupid right now.
it is sad that people will read things written to be provocative lies and even though the lies are dismissed the echo or memory remains. When one doesn't get continual access to truth, the ring of lies of the world tighten. Best learn now there are many who only read the headline and communicate with others to learn nothing. One truth for you is there is only the present and eternity, other states of time are unhelpful illusions that we in vain in our hands rolling for hours, stressing over loves made of mud.
@@svendtang5432The Bethesda fanboys would prefer the term: framework. They'd rather have a mediocre turd that they can modify with their ingredients, spices, and sugar than an actual 70$ AAA game. Doesn't matter how much you modify it, it is still a turd. Just a more polished, and modded turd in the next few years.
@svendtang5432 I keep seeing people say this, but it's NOT an RPG... there is no role-playing, even as Yamiks points out. You have no agency or control over the direction of the story or the fate of the characters within the story. It's all fixed. So you're right it's a totally different game, but it's certainly not an RPG.
Literally no one called it that... People like to add to the story, so when they talk down on it, it sounds a lot worse that it really is... Then again, it was probably from some garbage youtubers headline lol...
You made a good point that I noticed while playing that took me out of the immersion. EVERY SINGLE PLANET AND MOON had random buildings and people landing on them. It's not really exploring if every planet you go to is already explored
@@timothyarnold1679 NMS hhas aliens on every planet. They have not been discovered and charted by YOUR species. You awaken on a strange planet that isn't your home. Only "fast travel" is between systems, and then, it isn't really fast travel.
@timothyarnold1679 That's not actually true. Some do, some have nothing on them. I was on a radioactive planet with toxic gas clouds as my starting planet, and other than the single abandoned settlement to help me get the crafting parts to leave, there was nothing on that gosh-awful planet. The fact that single settlement was abandoned fit nicely with the lore that no one would ever (or should ever) go to that terrible planet.
Correction @ 27:03-27:10 = The first Bethesda game to use this engine was _The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind_ in 2002. It was rebranded from NetImmerse to Gamebryo in 2003, and Bethesda expanded upon it for _Oblivion_ in 2006, and still more for _Fallout 3_ in 2008. Bethesda then used the _Fallout 3_ codebase (basically Gamebryo with all Bethesda's refactors and proprietary tools, libraries, and other add-ons) as the base for Creation Engine and _Skyrim_ in 2011.
For all intents and purposes, Creation Engine is just Gamebryo with a new rendering layer. That's why it looks better (though I would argue not so much any more nowadays), but all of the core logic is still the same, hence the need for loading screens.
@@TheGallantDrake Very true. And my impression is that Bethesda has never done much beyond just piling more and more code on top and only rarely ever touching the foundation. At this point, I think it would be a great idea for them either to spin off a fork of id Tech to use going forward, or fork a fairly full-featured free and open source engine like Godot or Stride (formerly Xenko) and customize it to their liking (removing unneeded features, adding desired features, rewriting things, etc.). Either way, it is blatantly obvious that Bethesda Game Studios will not and/or cannot do what needs to be done with Creation Engine to get it where it ought to be. They just need hit the restart button with something new. And the good news is they don't necessarily have from scratch; my recommendation for id Tech is because it is the proprietary engine for id Software that was also a ZeniMax studio now owned by Microsoft, and so there would be no licensing fees (plus, it's a phenomenal piece of technology). Aside from that, a free and open source engine would be the way to go. They could do anything and everything they wanted with it and would never have to worry about licensing fees like they would if they went with another, outside company's proprietary solution.
Getting hypothermia in a full spacesuit on a planet with conditions *less severe than normal winter where I live* was the beginning of my "WTF is this bullshit??" journey and my, it's been a ride since then. Ugh.
Thank you for making this intensely necessary video about the reality of Starfield. The best thing I can say about Starfield after 45 hours is that it turned me on to Cyberpunk 2077 which I think I’ll buy this weekend, while uninstalling Starfield. After that I think I’ll just start pretending it never happened.
Best thing about this game is how vindicated I feel after not giving bethesda any money or even pirated time since OG Skyrim. Each game we stray further from daggerfall.
@@twosox3648 Because trend spotting. The stuff that turned me off about Skyrim, popular as it might have been at the time, was the direction Bethesda insisted on going: - Excessive Streamlining into the real of dumbing down. - Moving away from RPG into more shoot-y action - Similarly the moving away from sandbox play into almost force feeding their quest lines down your throat when you simply wanna loose yourself in the world freestyling. - Not last, but enough end it with my unwillingness to continuing to accept a product that is widely considered incomplete without a full suite of mods. The general reviews of the post Skyrim reviews pretty much corroborated my observations. So I made what I believe to be fair and well informed assumptions.
Yeah, having Starfield release between BG3 and Phantom Liberty really shows how bad it is in comparison. Have fun playing Cyberpunk, it's become a great game!
@@ImmopimmoI’m replaying Cyberpunk after a year and I am so amazed at where it’s at today. Don’t even need mods to feel powerful anymore (but I did do a few glitches for perks)
@@gamefinders4133the bugs and glitches are a funny thing, because before the update 2.0 it seems that the bugs were almost gone. After the update a lot of bugs start to popping out everywhere. To be fair they are most of the time just some random whacky sht, and for what the update 2.0 adds its a decent trade of.
Cyberpunk for example which was mentioned in the video. Also probably games like No Mans Sky or Star Citizen too since they’re fairly similar but with the difference being that they’re not as bad as Starfield at all.
🤣 I was all poised to drop £800 on a new GPU for this game, and then I watched the reviews. The moment I heard, "You do not land, or take off in your ship", I saved myself a lot of money! 🤣
@@RazielTheUnborn Not my kind of game, tbh. My old GTX 1060 6gb is happily running the games I do play; Project Zomboid, Rimworld, Kerbal Space Program, etc. KSP2 was the last bullet I dodged; I was all ready to upgrade...then watched the disastrous reviews! I'll spend the money when they start making games I'm interested in.
@@pigpuke With "proper" space flight, it would take hours due to the slower speeds of starfields ships to travel between planets, very exciting. Since they don't have true wings and are clearly not designed for in atmosphere flight, take off and landing would be fun too since you wont have much control, not to mention the ships would break up if you maneuver poorly, and retro/launch rockets aren't really ment to fire indefinitely so the ships can't hover.
Passionate devs create a great game franchise Great game franchise leads to a successful company Successful company attracts lazy un-creative devs and greedy investors Lazy un-creative devs ruin the great franchise and create bad cash grabs
People in marketing get all the credit for successfully selling the game so they are the ones who get promoted and start making decisions based on money instead of a good game because that's all they know and often don't even play games themselves.
The un-creative devs come from management. A few recent failed franchises fired all their original devs and hired inexperienced kids straight out of college to save money. Not only are these inexperienced devs not creative they bring all the weird woke ideas that everyone hates instead of just telling a good story.
Let's not forget about the leftard epidemic in the US. It's ridiculous. It is exactly what's ruining entertainment, not only in games. They're everywhere... everything they touch it turns into shit. No respect for original material, no talent, no writing, no creativity.
My view on Starfield is pretty simple. If you've never played a good space sim before, you'll probably enjoy it. If you've played games like Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen, or even Rebel Galaxy Outlaw, you'll be greatly unimpressed. As far as graphics go, if you've played any game in the last ten years, you'll be really unimpressed.
Elite Dangerous has what Starfield severely lacks, which is ironic since many people had always wished Elite Dangerous had that bit of depth Bethesda games were known for, which Starfield also lacks... Starfield fails as a space game, it even fails as a Bethesda game, a monument to modern Bethesda's lazyness...
Dude, Star Wars Galaxies loaded an entire planetary map with complete interiors. You could literally walk from one side of the planet to the other, stop in every building in the game and explore everything. Not a single loading screen unless you entered a dungeon. It just loaded assets in when you got within a certain distance of the location.
Not gonna lie, the Starfield reviews have been so much more entertaining than the few hours I actually spent in the game. I just can't comprehend how people ate settling for this mediocrity from a massive game studio.
If you look at the rest o fthe AAA market, there aren't even mediocre games to play. So a lot of people are over-hyping Starfield because design wise it's competent enough to provide A-to-B mechanics and storytelling, even though it doesn't do anything particularly well. If Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Metal Gear Solid V, orGears of War 2 released next week people would swear they were the best games ever made compared to today's releases.
@@billywashere6965 I can see that, especially on Xbox where from what I can tell, it doesn't seem to have a lot of unique games releasing lately. People should really just look at titles they missed from a year or two ago, there's plenty of good stuff out there.
I've never seen the equilvelent to stockholm syndrome, but for a game company, until this release. Like come on, even if you yourself like the game, you have to objectively realize and acknowledge what Starfield is severely lacking in.
@@mykeETxdoes Phantom Liberty make the game that much better? Have had Cyber Punk since launch, have come back to it about 4-5 times since then to see if better and it’s just not fun and never seemed to fix any of the issues
Starfield made me buy CP2077: Phantom of Liberty. Starfield I could not skip dialogs fast enough, CP2077 - I enjoy every conversation, im interested in characters, I wonder why I like them, whether I trust them or not. CP2077 looks better, flows better, provides better AI and environment AND YET, CDProjekt announced they are done with this engine. EDIT: I also, found out I dont even use fast travel in CP2077 - I enjoy driving.
I was playing Vanilla Skyrim while waiting for Starfield to come out. How much I was enjoying the game without mods was surprising. I thought I this was my final play of Skyrim because of Starfield, but there is no way I am uninstalling Skyrim. I am going to mod it all over again because The Elderscrolls 6 is a long ways off. Starfield needs more hands on space flight within a solar system, along with more reasons to do so, and land vehicles, but I doubt we will get them.
@@torrb420 mostly yes it depends on where you are if you're looking for Exabology, guardian ruins or? Thargoid stuff... But there's plenty of other things to do and I agree with you. I wish there was a lot more out there but also rare not overwhelmed like no man's sky. Every planet has abundant life which is kind of ridiculous. I don't think it would be too hard for them to create a windy dusty planet with maybe rare, unknown minerals, snowy or rainy would be nice as well. It definitely has its complaints
I'm having a lot of fun with this title. Don't think it's perfect by any means, and I have many of the same criticisms of it as this video, but my first playthrough topped out at 350 hours. I see what you're going for with your question, and I do admit that my most played game is Skyrim by quite some margin, but I've also played and loved a plethora of the other great western RPGs - KotoR, FO:NV, TW1-3, ME1-3, Dragon Age: Origins, Pillars of Eternity, BG1-3, Wasteland 3. Played plenty of mid RPGs too, like Two Worlds, Mass Effect: Andromeda and Kingdoms of Amalur. I don't think the takeaway is that you have to have poor taste or a limited repertoire of gaming experience in order to enjoy Starfield, but moreso that the gameplay formula of BGS titles just isn't utilised very often and for many it has an evergreen appeal, even if the implementation is flawed. Even people who think Starfield is a failure must be wishing that it had captured some of that earlier BGS magic in a more contemporary-feeling form.
You have to be one of the "fanboiest", blindest, most docile demographic to please. That's what Bethesda were going for, and believed the entire market had as little respect for their time and attention as you @@rioplats
17:01 Actually Fallout 4's camera moves when you are having a conversation to show your character's reaction like it does in Mass Effect. It's also usually at an angle rather than pointed directly at the person you are talking to. The NPC look straight at you is true for Oblivion, fallout 3 and New Vegas tho
The planets that had no life should’ve had hazards and resource gathering should have been challenging/ dynamic. Honestly should’ve been more of a survival game. They designed this game on purpose to waste your time just so you spending a bunch of time in the game might make you think it’s good
There was ONE quest that elicited emotion out of me. On the first moon you go to to kill that random pirate captain theres a POI that spawns that had a bunch of dead miners in it and on one of them is a tablet with a father recording his final thoughts and saying goodbye to his family. You get the quest to deliver the tablet to his now widow in New Atlantis. Literally the only quest in my 100+ hours of playing that didn’t bore me or piss me off.
Interesting, because I have taken Starfield with a slow and delibrate pace (around 50 hours) and never seen a boring quest. But opinions are like assholes... Sure, the main quest is the silliest shit I have ever seen, but I will skip that, like I did it Skyrim. Btw, there is no need to kill the pirate captain. I just said that there is no magic treasure inside Frontier.
@@BlackStar250874 the main story is so bad that I didn't get spoiled while I did get spoiled for the dlc of cyberpunk 2077. That tells you that there is nothing interesting to even talk about.
Some people can handle bad quest design. Once I realized that 90% of quests were fast travel to a person to either “Convince them” of something with the god awful speech check system or failing that just bribe them, the illusion shattered. Its amazing how terrified Bethesda is that you might fail to gain information in a conversation and how lazy they are to not build in other ways to obtain it that damn near every conversation that advances quests has a bribe option. Once you notice it you’ll never unnotice it.
Starfield falls into a uncanny valley between science fantasy (like Star Wars) and hard sci-fi (like the Expanse) where the celestial mechanics, planetary science and physics explanations are half assed and mostly make no sense, but doesn’t let you suspend disbelief like Star Wars let’s you do. That, and somehow they forgot to even add a calendar to the game which is the most basic, easy to implement way to help you feel like the universe exists and time flows through it to get immersed in.
Honestly they should have made max 3 star systems and fleshed them out. Had all the aliens on like 3-4 planets max. Instead of having alien creatures a dime a dozen on every other planet.
Wasn’t there even a developer who suggested multiple times to keep it a dozen planted but make them as detailed as possible? Todd wanted to keep the big number with the 1000 planets and stuff and the dev left Bethesda. I don’t remember exactly but I think it went similar to this.
I couldn't tell if it was the story's that were boring or if it was just the voice acting and dialogue that was delivered in such a bland way that made it boring. I think it is the latter, even something that is exciting in starfield is presented in such a boring way that it brings everything down with it
I imagine one of the voice actors really put emotion in their lines, and was told "no, no, no, your character on screen will look bored! you can't out act what's on screen! do it again!"
I don’t think the voice acting is bad. I think it just feels bad because the character and facial animations are so poor. And the writing and dialogue are probably not great…
I was playing Phantom Liberty yesterday. I was done talking with a character and as I'm about to leave through the doorway, the other character starts talking to me again. I turn around and had a small conversation in the doorway, like it might happen in real life. It felts so good and so natural.
I had thought about buying an Xbox for this game but decided to wait. Saw a review today that sat through the loading screens in real time and crazy looking NPC's and no. It felt really old and cheap. How lazy of them. They deserve all the crap they get for cheating their fans even if they still want to defend it. Like a wife with 2 bruised eyes telling everyone how amazing her husband is because he bought her spa day gift certificate
I hope they do. I'm tired of modding creation engine. Bethesda doesn't deserve being bailed out yet again. They either get their shit together or leave the market. My expectations for ES6 (you know, an actually interesting franchise) are rock bottom. Bethesda doesn't try as hard anymore now that MS is footing the bill to put their crap on GP day one. No shareholders to answer to anymore, no financial risk, nothing. They have no motivation to produce a good product, when MS will just lie to the public and tell everyone how great the game is and how many "players" are playing it. Starfield will forever be remembered as yet another FO76 and that's not a good look for Bethesda. They're not the kind of dev that would dedicate their time to making SF the best space game they could, like NMS. I'll bet you money there will be no follow-up to this game ever. It's a one and done idea from them.
I also hope they do. Modders shouldn't fix already broken, lazy and unfinished cash grab games anymore. Being a Bethesda game shouldn't be an excuse for bad and lazy game design, which modders should fix. BGS already expects this at this point.
I can't speak for others in the modding community, but I'm looking forward to sticking around. Not because I believe I owe anything to Bethesda or Starfield, and I do think this game has major problems, but primarily because we make mods for ourselves, not for others. We add in the features, NPCs, content that *we* want to see in the game, where the vanilla game is simply the canvas for us to fill and colour as we want. And as much as Creation Engine or Bethesda are derided, they are the only ones who offer anywhere near this level of modding flexibility and capability to enable that (even if on the modding/backend side, the engine is more borked than it has been for a long time). This may be disappointing to many in the sense that it provides little incentive for BGS to up their game or actually produce a contemporary-feeling product, but frankly to them: go play another game. I don't mean that in a vitriolic or sarcastic way and apologise if it comes off that way; just that anyone who thinks mods "bail out" BGS games aren't really the target audience for said mods anyway, and there are loads of good RPGs, sci-fi games, open worlds out there that probably suit those people better.
@@rioplats Exactly. On the same line of thought, we don't make mods because we feel we need to either. We owe BGS nothing and likewise with them to us. If we want to see improvements we vote with our lack of interest and time. They either continue improving or sink under the ocean of progress in the industry. I'll be damned if any dev company thinks it can hide behind its faithful community though. That's just me though.
why do you feel sorry for people? Pre-orders are one reason why the companies work the way they do, the money still comes in. If those who pre-ordered stopped and at least waited for reviews and gameplay videos before the release, the gaming industry would look better again within a few years.@@npc1822
Starfield already has "DLC" set to release a month after launch too... which we all know is actually just cut content that they removed just to resell as DLC.
I think the biggest flaw is that they managed to not make it fun. Even with all the flaws, I think we could've played with hopes of fixes and changes, and bettering the game the way no man sky did. But they skipped out on the fun, the way a college lecture would be hahaha
The only good story I found in Starfield was the grandma who was traveling alone. We had a nice little conversation over some tea before I left to grind loading screens once more.
If some random studio made this game and just released it with no hype, no one would give a shit about this turd and it would be forgotten about in the dustbin of shitty games. The only reason people even pretend to like it is because of the years of hype and the fact that Bethesda and MS were behind this and admitting the truth is too painful for some folks because it is an acknowledgement that we all got hustled, and well that isn’t a good feeling at all.
Starfield utterly broke my heart....I wanted to love it, I played 300+ hours. I have no idea what to play now, I'll need to scrape up some more money. Maybe Cyberpunk 2077 or Baldur's Gate III. I miss good RPGs. I am toying with going back to Elite Dangerous...thats how bad this is.
@@Korelon7 I typically headcanon most of what I do in RPGs to make my own characters. Its why I chose Starfield because I could at least name my own character instead of being called "V" in Cyberpunk which is my reason for not buying that game in the first place. Per BG3 I don't particularly care for isometric turn based RPGs but I noticed a mod that could at least make it a semi passable 3rd person view.
@@_Jay_Maker_ tbf: much of that time is probably afk. I tend to leave the game running over night when I shut my laptop lid so Steam is counting the time I'm not working or sleeping as playtime
I really enjoy Starfield despite agreeing with a lot of the common criticisms. Playing on PC I don't care about Xbox and couldn't care less about Bethesda. Starfield gets a lot of over the top hate from the PlayStation side for obvious reasons, but I fully get some people genuinely don't like it, I faking hate God of War but loved Horizon Zero Dawn so there ya go.
@@ummerfarooq5383 why there is need to use console command to improve the game. Btw, performance is the surface problem, the real problem is the gameplay where I have no intention of going back.
As someone who actually liked Starfield I was still very disappointed in it. I was hoping for the next Skyrim, but instead I played through all the quests once and was done was done with it forever.
21:37 Oof. The Battle of Whiterun actually brought up bad memories for me. That quest ended up breaking for me as soon as I entered Whiterun and ruined my save. 12 years later, and it's still the same stuff from Bethesda. Never disappoints lol. Great review btw
I usually wait a year before I purchase a new game so the devs can work out the kinks. Cyberpunk is a great example of this. A year later and the game is fantastic. I didn't wait with starfield and I regret it dearly.
Starfield is like construction in USA: cardboard and plywood, styrofoam and thin sheet metal; it's simply made on the cheap to empty the customer's wallet and adios!
The only mission which gave me a sense of “oh cool , this is actually good” is when you had to teleport through universes to advance through the mission. It was a great mechanic n I feel that they could have had something if they added it more to the game.
I agree with pretty much everything here, except this. The fast travelling. In previous games like Skyrim and Fallout 4 one of the most common gripes people had was that they were forced to walk everywhere, they whined and complained about not be able to fast travel from inside areas, about being forced to discover an area first before you could fast travel there and so on. Now they've given you the option, and get that, the OPTION to fast travel as much or as little as you want, people complain about that too. Seems they can't win. Why wouldn't people use it? Because they choose not to? For the sake of immersion? Because they feel that fast travelling everywhere is lame? Because they're able to show some restraint? You can just as easily choose to walk back to your ship, board it, use the navigation console to set a destination, sit down in your pilot seat, take off, then jump to the system, scan the planet, lock on to your location and land. If you choose not to do that, don't blame the game, blame your own lack of self-restraint and attention span.
sooo.. don't blame the game for including bade structure, design... JUST DONT USE THEM. are you seriously going to shift the blame from the game onto the player for simply playing the game in intended way!? no. Allowing so much fast-traveling is a detrimentto the game structure and most of all immersion. It's a cheap and lazy bandaid in place of clever and proper level-design.
@@TheYamiks That's one of the intended ways, not the only way, you talk as if you have absolutely no choice but to use it. It's an option, you can decide to use it or not, by design. Giving players options is never a bad thing, in this case they gave you the option to use it or not. Or in your case, use it and then complain that it ruined the game for you, when you're the one choosing to play the game that way. So yea, don't purposely shoot yourself in the foot and then complain that it hurts.
The Creation Engine could be upgraded to do asset streaming. Its just that BGS doesn't see the benefit (monetarily) in doing so. They also don't see the benefit in hiring actual writers or having a design document they update throughout the development process. So I personally don't think they have the best judgment. They also make enough money to continue to shit out bad games and the industry has never been able to put up a competitor that fills the same niche And 76 is far worse. Not only was it bad, it's still bad. The most terrible thing about it is that BGS players have been asking for co-op for years and it was a big ol "Fuck you. Here is multi-player. It's bad too and we will not even use what we learned from this to add the actual thing you want in future titles."
I'll say one thing, Todd is basically the Shady Car Dealer of the Gaming Industry with the way he can get away with the things he says and how many people buy into them. And as for 13:12 some people call this "The Bethesda Effect" in a nutshell
The most depressing part of all of this is the general tone deafness of Howard and Bethesda. They have their heads up their asses if they and aren’t even willing to acknowledge the criticisms of this game and say “We hear you, we are listening, we are taking your feedback and will be putting in the effort to make this the game YOU want to play” Instead they want to force us to like the game THEY want us to play. They should have gotten this game into early access as soon as they had something even remotely playable. They would have gotten feedback that all of their loading screens, lack of space travel and empty planets were not what the players wanted and pivoted to making it something people wanted.
Its a shame that it wasn't released on all systems, That way the Xbox fanboys wouldn't need to defend it so much, We could all stand back and see the game for what it is, A bareboned game designed for the modding community to make interesting.
I essentially had to marathon this game to keep myself interested in it I liked the end, liked the way they went about NG+, but overall, honestly this game is like a 4/10 at best
Honestly these reviews are really helpful. I was trying to decide if I should get RDR2, CP2077 or consider Starfield. I ended up getting CP2077 and man I've been having a blast. It definitely needed these last few year to work out the kinks, but thanks to people like you Yamiks I've been able to know what I am getting into. Its such a shame these days that you really need to wait until the game is out and the public reviews it, before you can believe anything that the marketting teams are saying in trailers.
definitely! That's what I have been finding out. CP2077 was kind of exactly what I was looking for in a game lately. I'm sure I would have loved RDR2 also, but was looking for something a little more sci-fi oriented with a rich lore and well developed world. And no joke, when someone in a review said that there were no gore effects in Starfield that pretty much put the last nail in the coffin for me. I mean it might sound a little morbid, but the gratuitous gore in video games is a lot like the gore in action movies, if it isn't there, you notice, and it detracts from the overall experience. @@spencerstevens2175
No contest if you want a futuristic gameplay, even the guns in CP77 are more advanced than in Starfield, i love to play around with power pistols doing ricochet shots on enemies... And the melee weapons now feels like black magic, especially the katanas that you can literally deflect bullets like a jedi
CP2077, even at its LAUNCH was so far ahead of Starfield in every conceivable metric: world building, narrative, NPC interaction and graphic technology. One has to wonder what Bethesda was thinking mid-bowel movement. Because they must have known that this turd was going to just pale in comparison. I am playing Starfield and enjoying the setting but DAMN
Amen! Even the Gorilla Arms feel super fun, which I decided to go for first, trying to go for more of a super soldier build than cyber ninja lol. I'll definitely make another V down the road sometime to try the other trees out, but for now I'm very happy with CP77. It's very rarely that I don't regret buy a new game at full price, but this one didn't have any regret sink in, just consumed more of my thoughts lol. @@efxnews4776
So glad NMS had the new update at the same time (adding another 100hrs to my file). It gave me the Space Fix I needed and made never playing SF now that much more gratifying.
100 hours on the new update how i completed all of it in a few hours and it's still boring as hell I do have more hours in nms than starfield but both are boring games with nothing to do. I have 300 hours in nms and that's after years of playing if i didn't play with friends it would have been much less time i have 120 hours in starfield and put it down a week ago.
If your goal is to just tick marks on a checklist then yes you will only get a few hrs. I'd say you were missing the point of the game, but really the point of the game is to make of it what you will. @@bishbosh7728
They could take 5 years to develop a new engine, and another 3 years to make a new game using the new engine. But the "lazy way" IS the "Bethesda way". We already accepted that they'll just keeps on re-releasing Skyrim "remastered" until the 2nd coming of Jesus anyway. Todd kept saying about NG+ but felt likes just an after-though idea, while Armored Core 6 did NG+ better and meaningful to the player's experiences. Also, whoever said "Bethesda's games is good", You're wrong. It's the MODDERS that made the games good.
Watching reviews of Starfield has been more entertaining than playing it. We want better.
true
Lmao been watchin nothing but them for days after giving up on SF 30 hours in. Worst game BGS has ever put out themselves.
I rather it was the other way around yk
I have to admit, I have sinked over 10 hours into starfield reviews.
@skeptiker1907 Bruh, why do YOU have my profile pic? huh?💀 XD
The audacity of Todd to call this next gen with the amount of loading screens will never stop being funny to me
And 2017 graphics
2007*
Ofc its not that bad but come on, there are games that are literally 10 years older that are looking way better and even better optimised. The “next gen technology” is obviously a lazy excuse for not optimisiging the game what it feels like at all.
@@grrfffGdeee-ev8nqgotta try and get everyone to shell out for vastly overpowered PCs so the optimization (or lack thereof) doesn't matter
Yeah and look at CP 2077 4x the detail with 16x less loading screens
"16 times the loading screens." 😂😂😂
I don't think we need a new PC upgrade, I think we need a new lead developer for bethesda games.
It makes money, why would top brass replace him. That's how business works..
@@SuperGirl-tf2wn what like redfall and fallout 76? 🤔🤣
Starfield isn't the norm for Bethesda anymore. It's also unusual that it's gotten so much hype and praise.
I'm not saying I hate bethsoft. I loved morrowind, point lookout, and the shivering isles. But a game studio is made up of its developers, and as devs are removed and replaced, it becomes Theseus' ship. It's senior leadership is to blame for that. Bethesda isn't the same Bethesda.
Stop using the old engine, creation.
or a new engine for bethesda!
@@kaarekleven3341 A new engine while good is still never going to fix the cancer that is todd howard and the team half assing everything to rely on modders because starfield problem is that there's nothing interesting to do, fallout 76 is a mess but at least there was something interesting to do (even if few)
Starfield can be summarized by this sequence: fly (load) into a planet, walk for ten minutes, get to an NPC, have them say "hmm yes, interesting, you should go talk to X on another planet", turning around, and going back to where you come from to repeat the sequence. Starfield is the game that could have been an email.
Well said I am pretty done with it after 200+ hours , don’t really see the point in building more ships or bases. Next game + is worthless also
The quests are literally forcing players to use fast travel all the time. 70% fast travel 10% walking and the rest boring dialogue with some uninteresting npcs
😂
@@AverageJoe1006I do wonder what held your attention for 200 or more hours though
@@thedoomslayer5863 the exploration not that there’s much variation , wandering around on small planets to steal some ships. doing some quests to see if there where any outstanding ones. 200 hours was a real long time I am still thinking how do I got there lmfao
The loading screens are the most surprising part of Starfield. They improved so much between Skyrim and Fallout 4, with the latter having quite a few buildings you could go in without a loading screen. How did they take such a step back?
@yazmeliayzol624 There's a difference between needing some loading screens and needing ones to go to a galaxy, go to a planet, leave your ship, board your ship, use an elevator, enter a building, exit a building, traveling just to get to different spots in one of the main cities, etc. It's obnoxious and they need to get a new engine. The reason they need immersion breaking amount of loading screens is because they've been scraping by with a nearly 15yo game engine.
@yazmeliayzol624 No, it absolutely should not have been entirely expected when the game was touted as a "next gen PC game" and the ridiculous system requirements were justified by that. It's pretty fair to expect "next gen games" to be better in pretty much every measurable way than the ones that came before, not worse.
@yazmeliayzol624 Who said I'm disappointed? I just said 6 trillion loading screens should not be expected in a "next gen game". I was personally not fooled into handing Bethesda money for this excuse of a game nor was I under the illusion that the game would be any better.
@yazmeliayzol624 Actually, a PC fangirl (the newest console I own is a PS 3), but I don't need to have played the game, when I can see the screens in all the streams I've seen. So, I guess if you call video evidence anecdotal, then yes.
@yazmeliayzol624 Great, post a link to your video of your gameplay where you don't need to see loading screens.
One thing Starfield is really good at, is making us appreciate other games.
There is one more thing. I never slept better in my life while I was playing Starfield.
Every Fallout and TES fan should be very worried!
Accurate
the wokeism is just to repulsive. Go woke - Go broke
yup ive gone back to Witcher 3 and loving the freedom of uninterrupted movement
Another example of why everyone should ignore the hype and never pre-order games. Make these lazy companies earn your money.
most "gamers" will never learn. Most are hype whores.
unless its fromsoft, they just keep giving.
I preordered Starfield, played less than two hours, and returned it. Bought No Man’s Sky instead. Way more fun.
I preordered it and i have no regrets. I really like this game but i see why it isnt for everybody.
I think I made this mistake now with Cities skylines 2
The writing is also lacking in the small details. For example, they wanted a monster whose name sounds scary and also sounds a bit like xenomorph. So they called it "terrormorph". It sounds like a first-draft placeholder that they never got around to changing.
It’s like how in Borderlands 2 there’s a side quest to rename “Bullymongs” into something more unique but it spirals down to a point where Hammerlock calls them “Bonerfarts” even that name is more creative than merely “Terrormorph”
Hey at least there was no “unobtainium” :P
It'd be cool if the terrormorph was originally like a biological method of terraforming a planet, which then got way out of hand, hence the name. But aint nobody got time for that.
They also tried really hard not to offend anyone, so -- like yamiks said -- everything had to be named, conversed about, and handled with kid gloves to the point of being pointless.
@andrewryan8507 Nah man, it's close enough to get the picture, and stupid naming is why I made that comment in the first place.
8:10 I noticed something. Whenever a publisher or developer says "We focused on X to make the gameplay more interesting" it means they never even considered Y and could not make Z work so they gave up.
Yeah, after tackling a couple projects of my own Todd comes off as an “ideas guy” who never actually did any real design.
seeing phil spencer laugh when the journalist asked why tod didnt optimize the game will never not make me laugh.
Next gen game = We put MORE loading screens :)
maybe Todd was speaking of PC2 ?
We were waiting for technology to advance so we could make an outdated game
Those loading screens are really next level though 😂
@@Isengardtomone of the loading screens of all time
@@Isengardtomnext gen game = more dlc and pay to win cash grabs
I like starfield for like 80 hours, then i tried baldurs gate.
I havent opened starfield since and one of the first things i noticed when i spoke to a dog in BG3 was that even the animals had better facial expressions than the NPC characters in starfield.
Baldurs Gate 3 is a fucking masterpiece. No other release this year even comes close. The depth of the characters, the narrative driven story elements, the nearly flawless implementation of the RPG style combined with the dice roll system that always makes every playthrough interesting... Its definitely one of the best games of the modern age.
Yeah, it doesn't even come close. In my instance it was Diablo 4, then I bought BG3 and the difference between both games is just so staggering.
I did the same but with Cyberpunk 2077, 100+ hours in Starfield and I feel dirty to expend so much time there, Cyberpunk is incredible in almost every way, the dialog alone is incredible. Starfield is mediocre at best 6/10 for me.
I love my scratch🥰....never played starfield cuz I knew better
Next you should compare Remnant 2 to Madden NFL 23 lol.
I had so much fun scanning the same plant 🌱 five times before the scan was complete that I uninstalled the entire game and started playing Red Dead Redemption 1 instead as it’s also on game pass. What a glorious gaming experience that is compared to Starfield even if it’s 13 years older.
yeah.. i didnt even bother making comparisons to rockstar games and how much more "alive" their open world feel I'd feel like punching down.. even with something like GTA3
I recently got RDR2, after all this time..
PREFERED THE FIRST RDR... not into interactive movies.
@@Lizards_Lounge I love the first more aswell
RDR 1 is such an amazing game
@@Lizards_Lounge100% agreed. Have no clue why RDR2 gets raved about so much when the original is far more fun to actually play. RDR2 is a technical and artistic masterpiece without a doubt but games are meant to be fun and that one puts me to sleep. RDR1 however i couldnt put the controller down and UN pushed it to even higher levels of badass.
The funny thing is, Starfield proved to me that Outer Worlds really was the Starfield Killer, years after its release.
At 160 hours in, I’m done with it.
One of the most infuriating aspects I noticed was the corner cutting they did with the extensive use if copy paste cells.
If you’ve been to one abandoned mine, military base, research base, and so on, you’ve seen them all, right down to the same loot in the same place, even the NPCs are in exactly the same place.
First time I ran into it I thought I’d already been to that particular site.
Yeah, I paid 15 dollars for this game and only got 200 hours out of it. What a freaking rip-off. I was looking for a life changing experience.
@@sizzlebuzz my God, right? I personally hate this game, but complaining after 160 hours…
That’s what irritates me the most. Same loot and weapons, too.
@@JakeLondonRiversI hate this way of thinking.
You can spend a lot of time in something and still dislike it. That's typically how reviews are done, otherwise you'd have fanboys saying, "you only spent 30 hours and didn't even give it a chance".
There are people with hundreds of hours in Skyrim who'd say it's "unplayable boring trash" without mods of any sort.
@@JakeLondonRivers People can have criticisms of games that they've put an extensive amount of time in. You have this so backwards lmao.
Nothing about Starfield now or in the marketing campaign made me want to play it.
That's because you're an intelligent human being who has standards.
Also being able to remember how Bethesda handled the last game they made also helps.
@@aries4378fuck you he's a Sony pony also a nintendtone who hates Xbox and gaming! Starfield is the best thing since halo infinite where hundreds still play it! I'm joking and apologize now for acting like an xbot. I thought about getting it but I waited for angry Joe btw great video of his.
The marketing made me want to buy it even less. "Twin games" are scummy, especially in cases like this or Dead Space. Despite what Todd says, this was just a reaction to Outer Worlds, which in turn was a reaction to Obsidian not being allowed to make another Fallout. The Dead Space remake was just a reaction to Callisto Protocol, which itself was just a reaction to Dead Space 4 not being green-lit and the studio being canned.
@@HughMansonMD Xbox best known for liquidating dev studio's.
then dont play it dude ... such a poor comment LOL? Seems your life is such a wreck hahaha
The constant loading screens did it for me,, the sheer never ending number of them for what feels like every single action made me close the game and uninstall. They used SSDs as a crutch
Hell even with a fast as hell ssd the loading screens are insanely long. Like 2-3 minutea sometimes. I pc takes like 10 seconds to boot.
@@TheSocketshock Mine were taking that long until I cleared all my old saves except for one and started NG+, I think it was my house with thousands of decorations in it... thanks Todd.
Same! After 50 hrs of loading screens i dropped the game and uninstalled as well! I couldnt take it anymore. Id start falling asleep after playing for 30-45 mins
Make sure to give the game an honest review, we need to voice our dissatisfaction where microsoft and bethesda get the info.
We know theyre not learning from what we say on youtube. 🤦♂️
That was my main issue too, even with ssd
As a writer myself, I'll give my opinion (TED talk) regarding Starfield's story (bad) and Cyberpunk 2077 (great).
First: Starfield has trash motivation
Consider Bethesda's other recent games, Fallout 4 and Skyrim. What was the inciting action for both of these games? In Fallout 4, after escaping to the vault, your child is kidnapped and your spouse murdered by random people. When you thaw from cryo sleep, your goal is clear: find my kid. In Skyrim, as your head is placed on a chopping block, a dragon that might as well be Satan himself, swoops down and destroys the village you're in. After you escape, you learn that dragons are not normally around Skyrim, so you have one goal: figuring out wtf just happened and why are dragons appearing. Meanwhile, in Starfield, you grab a mcguffin. Then a guy just randomly gives you, the mcguffin toucher, the keys to his space ship, and tells you to go to his club. You make it there to learn about the mcguffin, and all they have to say is: we don't know what the mcguffin is, we just want to find more... engaging, I know.
Where a game like Cyberpunk stands out as a fantastic story is this: first, you pick a background that has you complete a short mission where you meet your bestie. Then, time passes and your bestie has a big job in mind that will make you rich and famous. You come up with a perfect plan, carry it out, then unexpected sh*t hits the fan, turning everything after into a complete clusterf*** where you narrowly escape, only to be shot in the head and wake up later to learn that the long dead remnant of an edgy punk rock terrorist is in your brain, while you're told you are slowly dying and must find a way to survive. Not only do they give you a believeable motivation, but they serve it up to you with a helping of memorable backstory that helps you learn who your character is, what their relationship is like with the world around them, and a cinematic action sequence to really emphasize the high stakes game you're playing.
Second: Starfield's world is fake and it shows.
Starfield's world is pathetic. It is unbelieveable in many ways. First off, every random person feels the need to tell you random bs you don't care about. Like honestly, have you ever been walking down the street and some random guy goes: don't you hate it when you make a sandwich upside down? It might be funny the first time you hear it, but when it's repeated by twelve different voices one hundred times, it sucks! Like, just shut the f*** up! No, you wouldn't have killed me random pirate if I didn't join the fleet! I'd have caved your skull in and used it to drink canuck maple syrup soda out of! Meanwhile, Cyberpunk npcs only randomly address you if they have a reason to, like threaten you to get away, otherwise they'll attack you. You know, a bit more realistic. The former breaks immersion regularly, while the latter aids it. However, that might be a nitpick compared to the other things.
One thing that is clear is the way people talk in Starfield. They talk exactly the way you and I would. They don't use any slang we don't use, and any references that come close to showing its world are weird space references, i.e. sea shanties being sung with new atlantas in them. It's almost like everyone forgot about Earth and what happened there (and even that scenario is completely unrealistic considering Mars took billions of years to lose its atmosphere to what it is today. But apparently Earth could lose it in a few decades). Basically, the world has no history short of the recent colony war. Even on that end, the factions are pretty much the same. The only real difference is that one is just cowboy and the other police. Otherwise, they all speak the same language, they all do the same things, they seem to have the same values, etc.
Meanwhile, in Cyberpunk 2077, each gang has a unique appearance, culture, and lore. The world itself uses slang and references we don't, that make sense, as in, there us a clear reasoning behind them that you can see language evolving into: Eddies from Euro Dollars, or the shorthand ED; Preem from premium; klept, from kleptomania, the condition where a person steals on impulse; or choom, which could be chum but spoken phonetically in spanish. Even words like gonk or nova just make sense in their context. Plus, these are memorable. Meanwhile, the only thing I remember from Starfield is dust, as in, I'll dust your ship.
The world itself, the way it appears, makes sense. For example, why does a spacefaring superpower have a capital city with roads made of mud and feces? In Cyberpunk, the parts of the cities with said roads are where you'll also be able to throw a bag of crack attached to a rope over a bridge and be able to pull up a junky like you're fishing. But, the areas with the powers that be, are clean and have a real sense of order. The billboards showcase weird, dystopian, things like "real water" or "%70 real meat, meat." The news casts talk about things like the discovery of animals thought to be extinct like the western cotton tail. Meanwhile the ads in starfield are boring, and the newscasts about stuff you did. In short, the world of Cyberpunk feels unique and like it goes far beyond the bounds of the game, while in Starfield, it revolves around you and feels just normal, but in space.
Third, and last since this comment is already a small novel, the characters.
Oh my freaking Lord, are the characters in Starfield BORING. The first thing I felt when I met Barret was: this guys gonna be Bethesda's Jar Jar Binx, isn't he. Then, my first mission with Vasco was just me pistol whipping him nonstop for saying pointless, stupid things every ten seconds. The characters lack depth, substance, and just feel... well... like NPCs. You can literally understand most of their life by interrogating them for ten seconds and nothing more builds onto them after that, unless they're romanceable. Even after that, it's pretty shallow.
Meanwhile, in Cyberpunk 2077, the characters don't talk unless they are talking TO you in a conversation. No stupid quips, no stupid random I'm-so-unique dialogue. Then, slowly, and naturally, characters will open up to you as you interact with them in a way that shows them you can be trusted. Judy doesn't tell you about her childhood town until you do quests for her and show her you have her back. There's no "noname liked that" or "noname disliked that" bs because you shared your opinion on space lsd. It's just you and a character talking and getting to know one another, or butting heads.
I guess I could also say the dialogue options in Cyberpunk 2077 don't read like they're from a preschool text book. It's clear the writers went to great lenghts to consider the possible options your character could use to respond, and made them sound as realistically as possible. In Starfield, why can't I choose to use both the microbe and the Aceles for handling terrormorphs? They both have their pros and cons that complement each other, not oppose each other. Why can't I fish an answer like that out? Meanwhile, Starfield npc responses sound like someone who's pretentious, someone who believes they're smarther than they really are. Meanwhile, in Cyberpunk, they sound... well... like real people.
To summarize everything, Cyberpunk is a game that feel like the writers wanted to tell a story for every mission. They had a vision, a goal, and ultimately, the game could have been set in any number of time periods and settings and still had the impact it did. Meanwhile, Starfield just seemed focused on... how cool is space, while everything else was an afterthought. It seems like there was no planning; no end goal for a story. Tod Howard himself said that during an entire game's development, it's only about in the last year that Bethesda begins to really figure out what kind of game they're making. They have no clue what they're doing because they don't know where they want to go. It's why everything from gameplay to the story seem like a confused mess because Bethesda had no idea what they were making until it was almost done. Thank you for listening to my TED talk.
hell im not a writer and often about 90% of the shit goes over my head.. BUT when a game has such BAD story and writing that EVEN I engage my brain to analyze WHY it's bad : you've fucked up hard!
"In short, the world of Cyberpunk feels unique and like it goes far beyond the bounds of the game"
Thats because it does go far beyond.
Aint defending Starfield here (haven't played it yet, but boy does it feel boring af even after like 2 lines of dialogue from some video, really just at a glance), but Cyberpunk does have an advantage of like 30+ years of lore development prior to the game even being concieved. Not to diminish it's writing which gets damn stellar at times, or dev's hard work of sticking to the source material and not retconing stuff left n right cause they kNoWbEtTeR. Just all in all good and respectfull job they've done in lore department.
I think this is a case of them setting the game after all the interesting bits already happened. Game would have been far more interesting if it was set during the colony war tbh.
Even the camera mode draws a sharp contrast between the two games. In cyberpunk you have like a hundred different poses, some of them anime references and literal power ranger poses along with about every mood imaginable. Starfield? There's like 10? Only one has any personality, and as a result is the ONLY one people use for EVERY thumbnail. (Arms spread open pose)
So Starfield is the game version of Disney Star Wars then?
The biggest problem I have is none of the dialog choices reflect anything someone with even a room temperature IQ would say. The responses tend to be outright stupid or shows a lack of what the player has already learned. "Terramophs, what are those?" - Actual dialog option after completing the UC storyline and becoming head of the TDM (or whatever the hell it's called). I've slaughtered more than a hundred of these things already, what are you doing having an option for "WhAt'S a TeRrAmOrPh?". As Critical Drinker would say, "fuck off, game."
Vehicles would only highlight just how small (and yet somehow barren/devoid of interest) these procedurally-generated planets truly are. What a galactic disappointment...
I'm full-on Stockholm syndrome as far as Bethesda games go, but Starfield is definitely like 40% fun, 60% boredom, and 100% frustration at every turn.
50% of the game is half mental
I'll add an extra 10% of politically correct nonsense, too.
@@Falicon Maybe. If you mean the pronouns, I barely even noticed it. I wonder it the guy that ranted about it was upset when you could have a dick _and_ tits in Cyberpunk, though.
@@FaliconGame made me choose pronouns, literally unplayable. Cope harder snowflake
@@FaliconEXACTLY. Can't even escape reality without this company reminding us!!!!
Funny you mention the Skeleton found in the river in Skyrim, this is part of a Quest where you must find Narfi's sister, Raeda.
There is a 4hr15 RUclips video about this very murder mystery that was made just a few weeks ago, 12 years after the release of Skyrim.
Name one mission from Starfield that anyone will be making 4hr videos about in 12 years?
It... Was more than a few weeks ago lol, more like a year or two haha. Unless someone else made a video about it, in which case sweet.
This game scammed me ... $70 for a loading screen simulator with terrible dialoge and shitty graphics.
lmao *plays worlds smallest violin*
@@williamjoseph98 says someone with the lowest expectations for a AAA game
@@scifrygaming I never expressed that point of view anywhere. You are literally pulling that out of thin air lol I was simply laughing at the fact that you and many got bamboozled by this dogshit game 😆
😂Wow you're an idiot
BGS fans don't deserve good games because they'll always make excuses for Bethesda instead of holding the studio accountable for its laziness.
So the studio can be written off as a net loss, and I'm 90% certain that I'll never bother purchasing another BGS game for the rest of my life.
I'm calling it right now, every future bgs title will release on gamepass day 1
@KA-vs7nl Sounds about right. Xbox already has all their chips on the table, and are desperate to get Gamepass off the ground.
@KA-vs7nl -Stated on the 16th of August, 2024.
Dating comment for posterity.
imagine how cool it be if they had dismemberment and seeing limbs float around after a battle in space or coming across an abandoned ship slowly discovering floating body parts
I mean, sure, if the game was made on a different engine. No way the creaky old Creation is going to handle that kind of stress.
@@Narangarath Fallout 3/4 already had dismemberment (even Skyrim had decapitation), and Starfield's engine handles large numbers of zero-g objects extraordinarily well. It definitely could have been done. I suspect the omission was down to either a lack of imagination, or more likely imo the fact that the devs weren't allowed to add any more features in the last year of development (which is generally when devs add in the coolest little touches) in favour of polishing/making sure the game doesn't crash all the time.
@@rioplats True, but I couldn't even begin to count the times I've seen dismembered bits not behaving properly (in various ways ) in Fallout games. I can just imagine how meme worthy all that would be in zero G, but I guess they could have performed a miracle this time.
If only Bethesda actually planned anything they would've realized that the engine needed some foundational reworks to actually work with the game they wanted to make
Hey, the 10/10 reviews are super useful.
It is great to know which exact reviewers should be permanently put in the "knows next to nothing so their entire outlet becomes a freakin' joke" pile.
It's so useful that the minute one of these people get a new job, it instantly invalidates their new company.
You have to wonder how many of those early 10/10 reviews were bought. Because they came out very quickly and there's no way the reviewers could have played much of the game.
@@cdeford2 I mean, sure that's an interesting question, but at the end of the day does taking a bribe make them better or worse at their job, here?
I reckon actually thinking their 10/10 review was legit is much worse, because they'd be like a violin player who couldn't tell the difference between a 6 year old's first recital and an international soloist.
One of the reviewers is even own by the parent company of Bethesda lol
Paid off.
@@Mr.Canuck Of course just like the trash that comes out of Disney and other companies now like all the woke shit.
Nothing is next generation about this game even the engine is old generation
Yeah, I was so hyped for Starfield. Played it the second it was available. Forced myself to sink 50 hours into it. Took a break to play Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty and holy shit, the difference is night and day. Immediately immersed in a world, having a blast, no loading screens, graphics, gameplay, progression, audio, literally better in every measurable way. Starfield just makes me sad now for what it could have been. You made so many good points and really summarized my experience with it
Yeah, cyberpunk 2077 really spoiled me. All of the cities in starfield put together are like a single city block of Night City. And there's nothing to really do in any of them. If you took cyberpunk and merged it with Elite Dangerous, you'd have a masterpiece.
Same.. bought cyberpunk when 2 was released and resent starfield because it's so awfully average.
Have not touched starfield since but have played punk constantly.. The stories are amazing
« forced myself to play 50 hours »
Lmao sure pal.
@@Yeebok
So let me get this straight, you bought cyberpunk at launch and you resent starfield?
Man are your priorities screwed. Cyberpunk didn't work. Nothing they promised was delivered. The game was so bad and unplayable PS removed it from the store and offered refunds. But you resent starfield.
Yeah yall some liars who love bandwagons.
Anybody and everybody who bought the DLC for Cyberpunk are complete idiots. Project Red lied at every turn. And it took 3 years and a multimillion dollar lawsuit for them to get it right
@@jean-marcplante5411forcing means he was hoping to get his moneys worth out of it. Not like you'd understand.
Building ships is or rather was my favorite part of the game
Until you realize that there is no point in ship building because all you get for space ships is random encounters and loading screens for loading screens
Todd is a monster. It just hit me, all the dialogue is framed like Todd's conference shots, all (almost all) animations during convos are Todd's fake almost-smile (very punchable) with brow action and occasional arm movement, Todd's tone is also prevalent in the dialogues: stoic to the point of being eerie.
Todd, why are you so narcissistic?!
It's far fetched but I imagine working at Bethesda is a nightmare where uncle Todd is strolling about and showing you "hows't done". Like an attention predator and control freak with almost no emotion on his face.
Yet another zucc person
Lmaoo
Thinking .... If Bethesda produced a simple game that solely entailed punching Todd in the face (maybe throw in gut punches and crotch kicks for variety), that'd probably be a big winner.
@@7thsealord888 annoying Todd companion with ragdoll physics and punching minigame. That would be rad
Just can't believe this was praised as the Elite and Star-Citizen killer.
Despite the fact that ED manages just fine killing itself and SC never being alive to begin with this sound soo stupid right now.
never heard that .. its a total differnt game .. its an rpg none of the others are that
it is sad that people will read things written to be provocative lies and even though the lies are dismissed the echo or memory remains. When one doesn't get continual access to truth, the ring of lies of the world tighten. Best learn now there are many who only read the headline and communicate with others to learn nothing. One truth for you is there is only the present and eternity, other states of time are unhelpful illusions that we in vain in our hands rolling for hours, stressing over loves made of mud.
@@svendtang5432The Bethesda fanboys would prefer the term: framework. They'd rather have a mediocre turd that they can modify with their ingredients, spices, and sugar than an actual 70$ AAA game. Doesn't matter how much you modify it, it is still a turd. Just a more polished, and modded turd in the next few years.
@svendtang5432 I keep seeing people say this, but it's NOT an RPG... there is no role-playing, even as Yamiks points out. You have no agency or control over the direction of the story or the fate of the characters within the story. It's all fixed. So you're right it's a totally different game, but it's certainly not an RPG.
Literally no one called it that... People like to add to the story, so when they talk down on it, it sounds a lot worse that it really is... Then again, it was probably from some garbage youtubers headline lol...
You made a good point that I noticed while playing that took me out of the immersion. EVERY SINGLE PLANET AND MOON had random buildings and people landing on them. It's not really exploring if every planet you go to is already explored
Yeah, when i mentioned that sort of thing, i got told that fast travel worked because all the planets were already explored
Every planet in no man's sky already has people on it. No exploration?
@@timothyarnold1679 NMS hhas aliens on every planet. They have not been discovered and charted by YOUR species. You awaken on a strange planet that isn't your home. Only "fast travel" is between systems, and then, it isn't really fast travel.
I found one planet that had no one and had primordial life, but yeah I agree with you
@timothyarnold1679 That's not actually true. Some do, some have nothing on them. I was on a radioactive planet with toxic gas clouds as my starting planet, and other than the single abandoned settlement to help me get the crafting parts to leave, there was nothing on that gosh-awful planet. The fact that single settlement was abandoned fit nicely with the lore that no one would ever (or should ever) go to that terrible planet.
Correction @ 27:03-27:10 = The first Bethesda game to use this engine was _The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind_ in 2002.
It was rebranded from NetImmerse to Gamebryo in 2003, and Bethesda expanded upon it for _Oblivion_ in 2006, and still more for _Fallout 3_ in 2008.
Bethesda then used the _Fallout 3_ codebase (basically Gamebryo with all Bethesda's refactors and proprietary tools, libraries, and other add-ons) as the base for Creation Engine and _Skyrim_ in 2011.
For all intents and purposes, Creation Engine is just Gamebryo with a new rendering layer. That's why it looks better (though I would argue not so much any more nowadays), but all of the core logic is still the same, hence the need for loading screens.
That's like every other game engine it gets upgraded over time dumb ass lmao
When other studios upgrade their engines they actually refactor the code base. What the hell, Bethesda
@@TheGallantDrake Very true. And my impression is that Bethesda has never done much beyond just piling more and more code on top and only rarely ever touching the foundation.
At this point, I think it would be a great idea for them either to spin off a fork of id Tech to use going forward, or fork a fairly full-featured free and open source engine like Godot or Stride (formerly Xenko) and customize it to their liking (removing unneeded features, adding desired features, rewriting things, etc.).
Either way, it is blatantly obvious that Bethesda Game Studios will not and/or cannot do what needs to be done with Creation Engine to get it where it ought to be. They just need hit the restart button with something new. And the good news is they don't necessarily have from scratch; my recommendation for id Tech is because it is the proprietary engine for id Software that was also a ZeniMax studio now owned by Microsoft, and so there would be no licensing fees (plus, it's a phenomenal piece of technology). Aside from that, a free and open source engine would be the way to go. They could do anything and everything they wanted with it and would never have to worry about licensing fees like they would if they went with another, outside company's proprietary solution.
The game actually punishes you for exploration on foot by giving you hypothermia every time you venture outside your ship
Yeah, them "space suits" aren't very protective for the environments they are supposedly meant to protect you from.
Getting hypothermia in a full spacesuit on a planet with conditions *less severe than normal winter where I live* was the beginning of my "WTF is this bullshit??" journey and my, it's been a ride since then. Ugh.
Thank you for making this intensely necessary video about the reality of Starfield. The best thing I can say about Starfield after 45 hours is that it turned me on to Cyberpunk 2077 which I think I’ll buy this weekend, while uninstalling Starfield. After that I think I’ll just start pretending it never happened.
Cyberpunk is absolutely terrible
You'll enjoy it way more than shit field. Especially phantom liberty
@@eyewin85found you Bethesda fanboy do you slurp Todd’s tip daily???
@@GoatBoat22 Got something to say? Come say it to my face in the yard. Glove up or shut up.
@@thedoomslayer5863 Cyberpunk sucks Starfield is better, case closed.
Starfield is boring? I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you! ...well, not that shocked.
middly shocked? ( add picard meme gif here)
Best thing about this game is how vindicated I feel after not giving bethesda any money or even pirated time since OG Skyrim. Each game we stray further from daggerfall.
How do you know if by your own admission you've never played any of them?
@@twosox3648 Because trend spotting. The stuff that turned me off about Skyrim, popular as it might have been at the time, was the direction Bethesda insisted on going:
- Excessive Streamlining into the real of dumbing down.
- Moving away from RPG into more shoot-y action
- Similarly the moving away from sandbox play into almost force feeding their quest lines down your throat when you simply wanna loose yourself in the world freestyling.
- Not last, but enough end it with my unwillingness to continuing to accept a product that is widely considered incomplete without a full suite of mods.
The general reviews of the post Skyrim reviews pretty much corroborated my observations. So I made what I believe to be fair and well informed assumptions.
Starfield made me a huge fan! Of Cyberpunk which I played afterwards for the first time.
yeah it's weird HOW STARK the difference is... and cyberpunk is not even GOOD. (it's OK and mildly positive today)
Yeah, having Starfield release between BG3 and Phantom Liberty really shows how bad it is in comparison. Have fun playing Cyberpunk, it's become a great game!
Me too..
@@ImmopimmoI’m replaying Cyberpunk after a year and I am so amazed at where it’s at today. Don’t even need mods to feel powerful anymore (but I did do a few glitches for perks)
@@gamefinders4133the bugs and glitches are a funny thing, because before the update 2.0 it seems that the bugs were almost gone.
After the update a lot of bugs start to popping out everywhere.
To be fair they are most of the time just some random whacky sht, and for what the update 2.0 adds its a decent trade of.
The biggest contribution of Starfail to the gaming industry is how much more we appreciate other games now.
Which games?
Cyberpunk for example which was mentioned in the video. Also probably games like No Mans Sky or Star Citizen too since they’re fairly similar but with the difference being that they’re not as bad as Starfield at all.
Loading Screen Simulator was really good, but when they decided to add Menu Mechanics to the mix it really peaked.
🤣 I was all poised to drop £800 on a new GPU for this game, and then I watched the reviews. The moment I heard, "You do not land, or take off in your ship", I saved myself a lot of money! 🤣
Still get that GPU then get Cyberpunk 2077. Without mods it looks amazing. With mods it looks beyond insanity.
Nor do you fly in space - sure, you can buzz around and shoot asteroids in a tiny sandbox above the planet, but that's not proper space flight.
bought a 6950xt for starfield ,at least i got the game for free , my 6950xt justcollecting dust now...
@@RazielTheUnborn Not my kind of game, tbh. My old GTX 1060 6gb is happily running the games I do play; Project Zomboid, Rimworld, Kerbal Space Program, etc. KSP2 was the last bullet I dodged; I was all ready to upgrade...then watched the disastrous reviews! I'll spend the money when they start making games I'm interested in.
@@pigpuke With "proper" space flight, it would take hours due to the slower speeds of starfields ships to travel between planets, very exciting. Since they don't have true wings and are clearly not designed for in atmosphere flight, take off and landing would be fun too since you wont have much control, not to mention the ships would break up if you maneuver poorly, and retro/launch rockets aren't really ment to fire indefinitely so the ships can't hover.
Passionate devs create a great game franchise
Great game franchise leads to a successful company
Successful company attracts lazy un-creative devs and greedy investors
Lazy un-creative devs ruin the great franchise and create bad cash grabs
People in marketing get all the credit for successfully selling the game so they are the ones who get promoted and start making decisions based on money instead of a good game because that's all they know and often don't even play games themselves.
The un-creative devs come from management. A few recent failed franchises fired all their original devs and hired inexperienced kids straight out of college to save money. Not only are these inexperienced devs not creative they bring all the weird woke ideas that everyone hates instead of just telling a good story.
Exactly.
Let's not forget about the leftard epidemic in the US. It's ridiculous. It is exactly what's ruining entertainment, not only in games. They're everywhere... everything they touch it turns into shit. No respect for original material, no talent, no writing, no creativity.
All I ever wanted was a cabin on my ships (not carriers) in Elite Dangerous.
Star Citizen Buddy, it has everything you want, and will continue to add content until the servers die
@@Frank-os6gq will Star Citizen ever start fixing bugs at a higher rate than adding them? That game is pure comedy.
My view on Starfield is pretty simple. If you've never played a good space sim before, you'll probably enjoy it. If you've played games like Elite Dangerous, Star Citizen, or even Rebel Galaxy Outlaw, you'll be greatly unimpressed. As far as graphics go, if you've played any game in the last ten years, you'll be really unimpressed.
If you've played any good RPG in the last 5 years you won't like it either.
@@Korelon7 Truth. Skyrim is one of my favorite games, and I still play it to this day, but RPGs have gotten better since. Bethesda can't seem to adapt
Elite Dangerous has what Starfield severely lacks, which is ironic since many people had always wished Elite Dangerous had that bit of depth Bethesda games were known for, which Starfield also lacks...
Starfield fails as a space game, it even fails as a Bethesda game, a monument to modern Bethesda's lazyness...
Dude, Star Wars Galaxies loaded an entire planetary map with complete interiors. You could literally walk from one side of the planet to the other, stop in every building in the game and explore everything. Not a single loading screen unless you entered a dungeon. It just loaded assets in when you got within a certain distance of the location.
Not gonna lie, the Starfield reviews have been so much more entertaining than the few hours I actually spent in the game.
I just can't comprehend how people ate settling for this mediocrity from a massive game studio.
People will defend anyone. Everyones easily amused. Its only the people getting upset that are fed up
If you look at the rest o fthe AAA market, there aren't even mediocre games to play. So a lot of people are over-hyping Starfield because design wise it's competent enough to provide A-to-B mechanics and storytelling, even though it doesn't do anything particularly well. If Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Metal Gear Solid V, orGears of War 2 released next week people would swear they were the best games ever made compared to today's releases.
@@billywashere6965 I can see that, especially on Xbox where from what I can tell, it doesn't seem to have a lot of unique games releasing lately. People should really just look at titles they missed from a year or two ago, there's plenty of good stuff out there.
I've never seen the equilvelent to stockholm syndrome, but for a game company, until this release.
Like come on, even if you yourself like the game, you have to objectively realize and acknowledge what Starfield is severely lacking in.
lots of people who paid full price for the game and bought the special edition etc are still in denial about the money they've wasted
Yamiks, I am SO GLAD I never bought this game. Just confirms that Bethesda isn't worth giving my money to.
I'm happy I got it , but it's definitely a let down
I pre-ordered, then before launch applied for refund. Used the money to buy cyberpunk and phantom liberty. Best decision ever
@mykeETx I've got both games an you made the right choice
@@mykeETxdoes Phantom Liberty make the game that much better? Have had Cyber Punk since launch, have come back to it about 4-5 times since then to see if better and it’s just not fun and never seemed to fix any of the issues
@@PainCrashDaGPuff3000 The reviews say it does. This is my first time playing cyberpunk and am finding it amazing.
Starfield made me buy CP2077: Phantom of Liberty. Starfield I could not skip dialogs fast enough, CP2077 - I enjoy every conversation, im interested in characters, I wonder why I like them, whether I trust them or not. CP2077 looks better, flows better, provides better AI and environment AND YET, CDProjekt announced they are done with this engine.
EDIT: I also, found out I dont even use fast travel in CP2077 - I enjoy driving.
Starfield is NOT an Open-world RPG. It is an overglorified Loading Screen/Running Simulator.
I went from Starfield to playing vanilla Skyrim.
Skyrim is so much more engaging, right out of the box. It's surreal.
I was playing Vanilla Skyrim while waiting for Starfield to come out.
How much I was enjoying the game without mods was surprising.
I thought I this was my final play of Skyrim because of Starfield, but there is no way I am uninstalling Skyrim.
I am going to mod it all over again because The Elderscrolls 6 is a long ways off.
Starfield needs more hands on space flight within a solar system, along with more reasons to do so, and land vehicles, but I doubt we will get them.
Makes me appreciate Elite dangerous that much more, the openness and mostly VR.
And nothing to do on it while on a planet...
same
@@torrb420 false, you either look for a Bacteria or a plant and you can also Raid settlements on planets if you want to be criminal.
You know shits bad when elite dangerous is looking enticing again
@@torrb420 mostly yes it depends on where you are if you're looking for Exabology, guardian ruins or? Thargoid stuff... But there's plenty of other things to do and I agree with you. I wish there was a lot more out there but also rare not overwhelmed like no man's sky. Every planet has abundant life which is kind of ridiculous. I don't think it would be too hard for them to create a windy dusty planet with maybe rare, unknown minerals, snowy or rainy would be nice as well. It definitely has its complaints
7:50 Corpo speak for “We tried, we could not add the feature without destroying what works of the game, give us money and live with it”
If you meet someone who legitimately enjoys this game, ask them what other games they've played in their life
i notice that too.. it reveals some interesting....conclusions
Have you even played Starfield? And why are you so triggered if someone likes the game?
I'm having a lot of fun with this title. Don't think it's perfect by any means, and I have many of the same criticisms of it as this video, but my first playthrough topped out at 350 hours. I see what you're going for with your question, and I do admit that my most played game is Skyrim by quite some margin, but I've also played and loved a plethora of the other great western RPGs - KotoR, FO:NV, TW1-3, ME1-3, Dragon Age: Origins, Pillars of Eternity, BG1-3, Wasteland 3. Played plenty of mid RPGs too, like Two Worlds, Mass Effect: Andromeda and Kingdoms of Amalur.
I don't think the takeaway is that you have to have poor taste or a limited repertoire of gaming experience in order to enjoy Starfield, but moreso that the gameplay formula of BGS titles just isn't utilised very often and for many it has an evergreen appeal, even if the implementation is flawed. Even people who think Starfield is a failure must be wishing that it had captured some of that earlier BGS magic in a more contemporary-feeling form.
You have to be one of the "fanboiest", blindest, most docile demographic to please. That's what Bethesda were going for, and believed the entire market had as little respect for their time and attention as you @@rioplats
@@lalolanda8458 Yeah, sure, buddy. Have a good life.
17:01 Actually Fallout 4's camera moves when you are having a conversation to show your character's reaction like it does in Mass Effect. It's also usually at an angle rather than pointed directly at the person you are talking to. The NPC look straight at you is true for Oblivion, fallout 3 and New Vegas tho
Fo4 Conversation options are a cancer for Fallout series
It is shockingly scary how much more immersive dialogue is in cyberpunk. That game is simply quite beautiful interacting with people.
Skunk dialogue stinks
Compared to Starfield? Yes. Compared to say, Deus Ex, LA Noire, or Mass Effect? No.
Most of the npcs are pretty pointless and dumb in both
@@user-ok8yq6nc6x Yes but it’s immersion, the way they move, the eye contact, fluidity of movement, random mannerisms. The game feels great
Our standards are getting lower lol. Cyber punk immersion is absolutely terrible but this game makes it look okay.
The planets that had no life should’ve had hazards and resource gathering should have been challenging/ dynamic.
Honestly should’ve been more of a survival game.
They designed this game on purpose to waste your time just so you spending a bunch of time in the game might make you think it’s good
Instead you get to land on another barren planet to scan the same 2 types of plants and collect some space material over and over lmao. Exhilarating!
There was ONE quest that elicited emotion out of me. On the first moon you go to to kill that random pirate captain theres a POI that spawns that had a bunch of dead miners in it and on one of them is a tablet with a father recording his final thoughts and saying goodbye to his family. You get the quest to deliver the tablet to his now widow in New Atlantis. Literally the only quest in my 100+ hours of playing that didn’t bore me or piss me off.
Interesting, because I have taken Starfield with a slow and delibrate pace (around 50 hours) and never seen a boring quest.
But opinions are like assholes...
Sure, the main quest is the silliest shit I have ever seen, but I will skip that, like I did it Skyrim.
Btw, there is no need to kill the pirate captain. I just said that there is no magic treasure inside Frontier.
@@BlackStar250874 the main story is so bad that I didn't get spoiled while I did get spoiled for the dlc of cyberpunk 2077.
That tells you that there is nothing interesting to even talk about.
Some people can handle bad quest design. Once I realized that 90% of quests were fast travel to a person to either “Convince them” of something with the god awful speech check system or failing that just bribe them, the illusion shattered. Its amazing how terrified Bethesda is that you might fail to gain information in a conversation and how lazy they are to not build in other ways to obtain it that damn near every conversation that advances quests has a bribe option. Once you notice it you’ll never unnotice it.
What baffles me is that this game won the innovative gameplay Steam award.
I dont think Bethesda are even capable of conceptualizing the very idea of optimization.
Starfield falls into a uncanny valley between science fantasy (like Star Wars) and hard sci-fi (like the Expanse) where the celestial mechanics, planetary science and physics explanations are half assed and mostly make no sense, but doesn’t let you suspend disbelief like Star Wars let’s you do.
That, and somehow they forgot to even add a calendar to the game which is the most basic, easy to implement way to help you feel like the universe exists and time flows through it to get immersed in.
Honestly they should have made max 3 star systems and fleshed them out. Had all the aliens on like 3-4 planets max. Instead of having alien creatures a dime a dozen on every other planet.
Wasn’t there even a developer who suggested multiple times to keep it a dozen planted but make them as detailed as possible? Todd wanted to keep the big number with the 1000 planets and stuff and the dev left Bethesda. I don’t remember exactly but I think it went similar to this.
I couldn't tell if it was the story's that were boring or if it was just the voice acting and dialogue that was delivered in such a bland way that made it boring. I think it is the latter, even something that is exciting in starfield is presented in such a boring way that it brings everything down with it
I imagine one of the voice actors really put emotion in their lines, and was told "no, no, no, your character on screen will look bored! you can't out act what's on screen! do it again!"
I don’t think the voice acting is bad. I think it just feels bad because the character and facial animations are so poor. And the writing and dialogue are probably not great…
it's both
@@craighustlervoice the facial animations in Bethesda games haven’t improved since 2011 Skyrim
@@ravenwda007 True.
You underestimate the number of people who are easily amused and will happily play shitty games for hours.
Elder scrolls 6: jingle keys
I was playing Phantom Liberty yesterday.
I was done talking with a character and as I'm about to leave through the doorway, the other character starts talking to me again.
I turn around and had a small conversation in the doorway, like it might happen in real life.
It felts so good and so natural.
Then go play that game and stop playing Starfield and have a cup of STFU
I had thought about buying an Xbox for this game but decided to wait. Saw a review today that sat through the loading screens in real time and crazy looking NPC's and no. It felt really old and cheap. How lazy of them. They deserve all the crap they get for cheating their fans even if they still want to defend it. Like a wife with 2 bruised eyes telling everyone how amazing her husband is because he bought her spa day gift certificate
Hopefully the modders don't abandon this game without them theres nothing to look forward to in it
I hope they do. I'm tired of modding creation engine. Bethesda doesn't deserve being bailed out yet again. They either get their shit together or leave the market. My expectations for ES6 (you know, an actually interesting franchise) are rock bottom. Bethesda doesn't try as hard anymore now that MS is footing the bill to put their crap on GP day one. No shareholders to answer to anymore, no financial risk, nothing. They have no motivation to produce a good product, when MS will just lie to the public and tell everyone how great the game is and how many "players" are playing it. Starfield will forever be remembered as yet another FO76 and that's not a good look for Bethesda. They're not the kind of dev that would dedicate their time to making SF the best space game they could, like NMS. I'll bet you money there will be no follow-up to this game ever. It's a one and done idea from them.
I also hope they do. Modders shouldn't fix already broken, lazy and unfinished cash grab games anymore. Being a Bethesda game shouldn't be an excuse for bad and lazy game design, which modders should fix. BGS already expects this at this point.
I can't speak for others in the modding community, but I'm looking forward to sticking around. Not because I believe I owe anything to Bethesda or Starfield, and I do think this game has major problems, but primarily because we make mods for ourselves, not for others. We add in the features, NPCs, content that *we* want to see in the game, where the vanilla game is simply the canvas for us to fill and colour as we want. And as much as Creation Engine or Bethesda are derided, they are the only ones who offer anywhere near this level of modding flexibility and capability to enable that (even if on the modding/backend side, the engine is more borked than it has been for a long time).
This may be disappointing to many in the sense that it provides little incentive for BGS to up their game or actually produce a contemporary-feeling product, but frankly to them: go play another game. I don't mean that in a vitriolic or sarcastic way and apologise if it comes off that way; just that anyone who thinks mods "bail out" BGS games aren't really the target audience for said mods anyway, and there are loads of good RPGs, sci-fi games, open worlds out there that probably suit those people better.
@@rioplats Exactly. On the same line of thought, we don't make mods because we feel we need to either. We owe BGS nothing and likewise with them to us. If we want to see improvements we vote with our lack of interest and time. They either continue improving or sink under the ocean of progress in the industry. I'll be damned if any dev company thinks it can hide behind its faithful community though. That's just me though.
The most offending thing about Starfield is the PRICE tag, it is one of the most expensive games in my library 😥
a major reason i didnt buy it, i feel really bad for people who pre ordered the game for $100 and diidnt like it.
Gamepass is about 1 dollar a month if you get it with a vpn from a poor and dirty country.
well I like owning the games sooo yeah, I know about xpass, I just don't like it.@@bobbyboyderecords
why do you feel sorry for people? Pre-orders are one reason why the companies work the way they do, the money still comes in. If those who pre-ordered stopped and at least waited for reviews and gameplay videos before the release, the gaming industry would look better again within a few years.@@npc1822
you paid money for this?
Starfield already has "DLC" set to release a month after launch too... which we all know is actually just cut content that they removed just to resell as DLC.
I think the biggest flaw is that they managed to not make it fun. Even with all the flaws, I think we could've played with hopes of fixes and changes, and bettering the game the way no man sky did. But they skipped out on the fun, the way a college lecture would be hahaha
imagine if starfield was a starwars game, thats made by respawn. No where near the amount of defending from the fans, I guarantee
Fast travel is always a bit immersion breaking, but RDR2 did it really nicely
The only good story I found in Starfield was the grandma who was traveling alone. We had a nice little conversation over some tea before I left to grind loading screens once more.
It was nice the first time i found her.
Every other interaction feels so bland and overused.
If some random studio made this game and just released it with no hype, no one would give a shit about this turd and it would be forgotten about in the dustbin of shitty games.
The only reason people even pretend to like it is because of the years of hype and the fact that Bethesda and MS were behind this and admitting the truth is too painful for some folks because it is an acknowledgement that we all got hustled, and well that isn’t a good feeling at all.
Starfield is an insult to intelligence.
Starfield utterly broke my heart....I wanted to love it, I played 300+ hours. I have no idea what to play now, I'll need to scrape up some more money. Maybe Cyberpunk 2077 or Baldur's Gate III. I miss good RPGs. I am toying with going back to Elite Dangerous...thats how bad this is.
Holy shit.
Maybe the issue isn't that you need to play other games.
You miss good RPGS but choose Starfield over BG3 or Phantom Liberty. Typical Elite player brain lmao
@@Korelon7 I typically headcanon most of what I do in RPGs to make my own characters. Its why I chose Starfield because I could at least name my own character instead of being called "V" in Cyberpunk which is my reason for not buying that game in the first place. Per BG3 I don't particularly care for isometric turn based RPGs but I noticed a mod that could at least make it a semi passable 3rd person view.
@@_Jay_Maker_ tbf: much of that time is probably afk. I tend to leave the game running over night when I shut my laptop lid so Steam is counting the time I'm not working or sleeping as playtime
I am shocked that so many people are playing Starfield. What rock or underwater city did they crawl out of?
Because its the first big game Xbox have put out since forever, they have bo choice.
I really enjoy Starfield despite agreeing with a lot of the common criticisms. Playing on PC I don't care about Xbox and couldn't care less about Bethesda. Starfield gets a lot of over the top hate from the PlayStation side for obvious reasons, but I fully get some people genuinely don't like it, I faking hate God of War but loved Horizon Zero Dawn so there ya go.
@@Battleneter what is so fun about Starfield? Truly? Legitimate question.
@@ewjiml What's a game you like?, a hell of a lot of people enjoy Starfield it's just a fact, you are not actually required to like it.
@@Battleneter No wonder so many videos are made about Starfield. Fans can’t even answer a simple question.
I can get 60fps on CP2077 with my GTX1060, 40-50 on BG3, while only getting 25 on Starfield....
Go type SGTM 10 in starfield
@@ummerfarooq5383 why there is need to use console command to improve the game. Btw, performance is the surface problem, the real problem is the gameplay where I have no intention of going back.
@@Jamgcy did you type it though?
As someone who actually liked Starfield I was still very disappointed in it. I was hoping for the next Skyrim, but instead I played through all the quests once and was done was done with it forever.
21:37 Oof. The Battle of Whiterun actually brought up bad memories for me. That quest ended up breaking for me as soon as I entered Whiterun and ruined my save. 12 years later, and it's still the same stuff from Bethesda. Never disappoints lol. Great review btw
With those games , corrupted files ,crashes etc. I now make new save games every time I save the game and have at least 10 back up save files.
@@AverageJoe1006 Yup lol. I'm already on like manual save 300 of starfield because I trust no one.
I usually wait a year before I purchase a new game so the devs can work out the kinks. Cyberpunk is a great example of this. A year later and the game is fantastic. I didn't wait with starfield and I regret it dearly.
A year later? Didn't it come out in like 2017?
The NPCs very strongly remind me of the ones in Wing Commander 1 (1990), they are more or less static except for their mouths moving... 🙄
wasn t that some FMV game?
@@kaollachan Not originally, the first two games were graphically driven, after that they became FMV (Wing 3,4,and 5).
F'n love wing commander. Bought a snes jus to replay
I guarantee the game scrapped all gore or dismemberment because their engine would collapse if it were introduced in zero g
Starfield is like construction in USA: cardboard and plywood, styrofoam and thin sheet metal; it's simply made on the cheap to empty the customer's wallet and adios!
The only mission which gave me a sense of “oh cool , this is actually good” is when you had to teleport through universes to advance through the mission. It was a great mechanic n I feel that they could have had something if they added it more to the game.
best take of this soulless game so far.
Cyberpunk 2.0 >>>>>> starfield
I agree with pretty much everything here, except this. The fast travelling. In previous games like Skyrim and Fallout 4 one of the most common gripes people had was that they were forced to walk everywhere, they whined and complained about not be able to fast travel from inside areas, about being forced to discover an area first before you could fast travel there and so on. Now they've given you the option, and get that, the OPTION to fast travel as much or as little as you want, people complain about that too. Seems they can't win.
Why wouldn't people use it? Because they choose not to? For the sake of immersion? Because they feel that fast travelling everywhere is lame? Because they're able to show some restraint? You can just as easily choose to walk back to your ship, board it, use the navigation console to set a destination, sit down in your pilot seat, take off, then jump to the system, scan the planet, lock on to your location and land. If you choose not to do that, don't blame the game, blame your own lack of self-restraint and attention span.
sooo.. don't blame the game for including bade structure, design... JUST DONT USE THEM.
are you seriously going to shift the blame from the game onto the player for simply playing the game in intended way!?
no. Allowing so much fast-traveling is a detrimentto the game structure and most of all immersion. It's a cheap and lazy bandaid in place of clever and proper level-design.
@@TheYamiks That's one of the intended ways, not the only way, you talk as if you have absolutely no choice but to use it. It's an option, you can decide to use it or not, by design. Giving players options is never a bad thing, in this case they gave you the option to use it or not. Or in your case, use it and then complain that it ruined the game for you, when you're the one choosing to play the game that way. So yea, don't purposely shoot yourself in the foot and then complain that it hurts.
but it's not an option, if your other option is, board ship and THEN fast travel. there is no exploring. there is only fast travel
@@sigmachud9092 No. See my 2nd comment above. If you choose to fast travel everywhere, that's on you.
This game suffers from about 98x too much meaningless dialogue. Todd thinks more dialogue makes for a better game.
Yep although I enjoy Starfield I agree, I found myself skipping a lot of the dialogue where I felt it was likely pointless.
The comparison with elite dangerous and no man sky for the space sim, and BG3 for rhe narrative hit hard on this one.
Don't forget the one about gameplay with CP77
@@efxnews4776 I have still not played CP77 yet, but obviously.
The Creation Engine could be upgraded to do asset streaming. Its just that BGS doesn't see the benefit (monetarily) in doing so. They also don't see the benefit in hiring actual writers or having a design document they update throughout the development process.
So I personally don't think they have the best judgment. They also make enough money to continue to shit out bad games and the industry has never been able to put up a competitor that fills the same niche
And 76 is far worse. Not only was it bad, it's still bad. The most terrible thing about it is that BGS players have been asking for co-op for years and it was a big ol "Fuck you. Here is multi-player. It's bad too and we will not even use what we learned from this to add the actual thing you want in future titles."
I'll say one thing, Todd is basically the Shady Car Dealer of the Gaming Industry with the way he can get away with the things he says and how many people buy into them.
And as for 13:12 some people call this "The Bethesda Effect" in a nutshell
The most depressing part of all of this is the general tone deafness of Howard and Bethesda.
They have their heads up their asses if they and aren’t even willing to acknowledge the criticisms of this game and say “We hear you, we are listening, we are taking your feedback and will be putting in the effort to make this the game YOU want to play”
Instead they want to force us to like the game THEY want us to play.
They should have gotten this game into early access as soon as they had something even remotely playable. They would have gotten feedback that all of their loading screens, lack of space travel and empty planets were not what the players wanted and pivoted to making it something people wanted.
Its a shame that it wasn't released on all systems, That way the Xbox fanboys wouldn't need to defend it so much, We could all stand back and see the game for what it is, A bareboned game designed for the modding community to make interesting.
I essentially had to marathon this game to keep myself interested in it
I liked the end, liked the way they went about NG+, but overall, honestly this game is like a 4/10 at best
Honestly these reviews are really helpful. I was trying to decide if I should get RDR2, CP2077 or consider Starfield. I ended up getting CP2077 and man I've been having a blast. It definitely needed these last few year to work out the kinks, but thanks to people like you Yamiks I've been able to know what I am getting into. Its such a shame these days that you really need to wait until the game is out and the public reviews it, before you can believe anything that the marketting teams are saying in trailers.
You made a good decision. Game is really fun and if you want to learn about the lore etc it's Miles better than Snorefield
definitely! That's what I have been finding out. CP2077 was kind of exactly what I was looking for in a game lately. I'm sure I would have loved RDR2 also, but was looking for something a little more sci-fi oriented with a rich lore and well developed world.
And no joke, when someone in a review said that there were no gore effects in Starfield that pretty much put the last nail in the coffin for me. I mean it might sound a little morbid, but the gratuitous gore in video games is a lot like the gore in action movies, if it isn't there, you notice, and it detracts from the overall experience. @@spencerstevens2175
No contest if you want a futuristic gameplay, even the guns in CP77 are more advanced than in Starfield, i love to play around with power pistols doing ricochet shots on enemies...
And the melee weapons now feels like black magic, especially the katanas that you can literally deflect bullets like a jedi
CP2077, even at its LAUNCH was so far ahead of Starfield in every conceivable metric: world building, narrative, NPC interaction and graphic technology. One has to wonder what Bethesda was thinking mid-bowel movement. Because they must have known that this turd was going to just pale in comparison. I am playing Starfield and enjoying the setting but DAMN
Amen! Even the Gorilla Arms feel super fun, which I decided to go for first, trying to go for more of a super soldier build than cyber ninja lol. I'll definitely make another V down the road sometime to try the other trees out, but for now I'm very happy with CP77. It's very rarely that I don't regret buy a new game at full price, but this one didn't have any regret sink in, just consumed more of my thoughts lol. @@efxnews4776
So glad NMS had the new update at the same time (adding another 100hrs to my file). It gave me the Space Fix I needed and made never playing SF now that much more gratifying.
100 hours on the new update how i completed all of it in a few hours and it's still boring as hell I do have more hours in nms than starfield but both are boring games with nothing to do. I have 300 hours in nms and that's after years of playing if i didn't play with friends it would have been much less time i have 120 hours in starfield and put it down a week ago.
If your goal is to just tick marks on a checklist then yes you will only get a few hrs. I'd say you were missing the point of the game, but really the point of the game is to make of it what you will. @@bishbosh7728
They could take 5 years to develop a new engine, and another 3 years to make a new game using the new engine. But the "lazy way" IS the "Bethesda way". We already accepted that they'll just keeps on re-releasing Skyrim "remastered" until the 2nd coming of Jesus anyway. Todd kept saying about NG+ but felt likes just an after-though idea, while Armored Core 6 did NG+ better and meaningful to the player's experiences. Also, whoever said "Bethesda's games is good", You're wrong. It's the MODDERS that made the games good.
Sean Murray shitting on todd howard, with 1/100 9f the resources. if i was todd id dust off the resume.
Starfield truly is a game
One of the games of all time, even
one of the functioning software of all time
The best example of a game of all time