The fact you interviewed Todd recently and now calling out Bethesda speaks volume. Most people wouldn’t dare to get on a company’s bad side in fear of being blacklisted for good, but you’re still taking the risk to keep your authenticity. Honestly, big respect
Guaranteed Todd agreed to Matty's interview because Matty is fair. Fair means praise OR criticism when either is earned. Personally, I love Starfield, but there is no doubt it is insanely polarizing.
@@xandolio865 This. Like, it's clear Starfield has flaws...Alot of flaws even. But it's not a bad game. It's still redeemable with more updates and more content/features. It definitely deserves the criticism it gets. But alot of people are just following the hate train without any real feedback.
Damn that was deep. That was a huge part of what made Oblivion seem to wildly ahead of other games was the radiant AI making it seem like the NPCs were "living" their lives whether the player was there or not.
I am still astounded at how badly they dropped the Fallout show hype ball with not having a bunch of new Fallout content ready to go. Instead they just break FO4 and bail. What the fuck are they thinking.
Huh. That's a really funny takeaway about FO3. My problem with the ending was that you can literally have a Ghoul or Super Mutant companion with the ability to put in the code and they just won't do it, so the only option is to sacrifice a life when it's completely unnecessary. It's the peak of "we as writers decided the story ends this way".
It is peak bad writing from Bethesda. FO3's story was already contrived and lame in so many ways after the opening but the original ending was the worst part. There is *no* reason Fawkes shouldn't take the radiation instead of you, and the fact that with the Broken Steel version of the ending they basically call you a coward for letting him go instead of you... it's something else.
Emil needs to lose his job, and I don’t say that lightly. Dudes been a complete disaster since he started there and actively spits in the face of lore repeatedly… he’ll he even says he won’t be beholden to what came before…. Dudes an egomaniac
I can't dislike Emil because he's always come across as a pretty nice guy. I even think he has some great ideas (Unity in Starfield being a great NG+ tool) But I do think something needs to be done as he's been coasting off of one great questline in Oblivion for nearly 20 years now.
_Starfield_ feels like a dead amusement park. You walk up to an attraction, push the button, and animatronic Abraham Lincon tells you about the Civil War between the Freestar Collective and United Colonies. And an hour later he's still there, waiting for you to push the button. The world isn't alive. Nothing changes, not really. Nothing feels like it matters. Nobody makes decisions. Why am I deciding _for the UC Council_ what to do about heatleeches? Why am I the single most important person in the universe and nobody else exists or acts on their own?
Because it’s a game and you’re the protagonist. There’s a mission in Shattered Space where you help a family recover armor and relics. Players on Reddit are flipping shit because they don’t get the armor, the NPC does. So if your not the single most important person, people still shit on it
Because it's a game & you're.... oh, I see someone already pointed it out. If you pay attention to the writing (which presumably people must have done to be able to form the opinion that it's soooo terrible.... 😂) you would have learned the narrative justification why an outsider was asked to shoulder such responsibility. Sometimes it's like people just want to complain....
No, I understand what you're saying and the replies points of view. The world doesn't feel alive. Most NPC don't even have a routine in Starfield. An example is the staff of MAST they don't leave the building at all. I have practically saved the settled systems, but Admiral Logan, who was their during the terrormoph crisis, somehow forgets who I am during Sarah's quest back to the planet she crashes on is immersion breaking. Why would you need to ask who we are?
A protagonist isn't the centre of the universe. Why are stores open all of the time w/o the vendors ever leaving? Why can I sleep for seven years and the whole galaxy just stays on hold, waiting for me? Nothing happens if I don't do it and nothing affects anything else. Why would the UC-Vanguard want an FC-Ranger on their team or vice-versa? Why do my relationships have no impact on one another? Why do I need to be introduced as a stranger to people who also know me as a hero? Why can I start an important, vital, quest, then disappear for a year doing other things and everyone is just waiting for me. Time out the quest, give me stakes, make things matter. The world is dead. It could have been so much more.
I mean they already went ahead and warned everyone about having to high expectations about elder scrolls 6 so you know that bethesda is not willing to change anything!
Because the world and lore are established. DEi, ESG, people scared about HR or about sjw co-workers will have a shield. Where as with starfield they didn't
Emil is a huge part of the problem at BGS, to be honest it seems like leadership in general needs a shake up there, considering he couldn't have stayed in his position for so long without the backing of other management.
Precisely. Emil is the most blatant and obvious example of problems at Bethesda, but the scary part is: no one in their right mind would allow him to stay where he is unless they themselves are incompetent or not thinking clearly. That Emil has his job is a sign that people above him aren't great at their jobs either. Apparently Emil and Todd were friends before Bethesda, and if that's true, yeah, there's a clear bias in play here that's killing the company.
@@Longknifeeven then with Todd being friends with Emil I don’t think it should justify him staying. Michael kirkbride also I believe is old friends with Todd and yet he I believe left the company recently due to creative issues. I used to have sympathy for Emil, I didn’t think he was the worst (definitely not the best) and I enjoyed some of his stories but he clearly isn’t working with Bethesda. I don’t understand how a company which now has clear objective issues won’t be willing to change for their own profit. The engine needs to change, the game mechanics need to change and the writing needs to change.
@@williamfrank962 Michael Kirkbride left the company ages ago, but still did consulting work here and there since he wrote a huge percent of the lore. What DID happen is Kurt Kuhlmann was "encouraged" to leave the company, which was odd, given they previously described him as their resident Elder Scrolls lore expert. We also only know he was "encouraged" to leave because Michael Kirkbride said as much, implying that he thought it was a mistake to drive him off.
At this point Emil could just say what he truly thinks: "We made an amazing game and you'll haters can suck me off day after day". He has an enormous ego that is taking down Bethesda for years.
No creators these days ever want to just sit back and ask themselves, "Did I just make a bad product?" Nah, it has to be the fans fault, every single time. That, or just call them racist and move on.
Emil’s comment on F3’s ending is very telling. Players didn’t have a problem with dying. The problem was that Fawkes was totally able to go into the chamber for you but just says “naw, sorry. To lazy to develop that ending”. Only for you to somehow survive a fatal radiation dose in Broken Steel. Bro.
They're learning all the wrong lessons. Also as long as Emil is in a leadership role in the team I don't have any hope for any of their future projects, sadly.
@@w_stlerymes I honestly feel the same is true for Todd Howard too. He 100% knows that the games he promotes and directs are not what they used to be and frankly some would say are in unacceptable condition at release. He’s also a champion for Emil. Emil has no place in the role he is in, Todd seems to be a complicit liar 🤥 and as result seems two faced. I understand the entire industry is failing to understand what the community wants or at the very least to release games at the same quality of the past, but Bethesda has been declining NOTICEABLY for over 10 years, if not longer. I’m not one to revel in the misfortune of others, but in someways the situation Ubisoft has gotten itself into gives me hope that if they can be forced to reckon with consequences of poor design choices and leadership decisions, maybe one day Bethesda will have to change for the better too.
@@dannygleason5912 I frankly do not want to see these companies change for the better. I want them to end up not existing because the people in them who make the games what they are need that black mark on their record. "Oh, mister Emil Pathetic... hmmm... says here you wrote the story of BethesdaOut 4... wait, that company went bankrupt after every subsequent game went belly-up and became a stink-bomb in the press. Do you have an explanation for that?" Emil cannot come up with an explanation for the fates of BethesdaOut 76 or Starfield that does not make him look unsuited for writing jobs. I doubt he even understands that the industry is aware of his paper airplanes quote and it does not endear him to said industry. I know I would never hire anyone who said that to participate in making an RPG.
@@dannygleason5912 Fallout 76 was that point where Bethesda stopped feeling like Bethesda, for me anyhow. ESO was a different studio, and Fallout 76 really should have been as well. I notice a lot of "live service" design decisions baked into Starfield where they don't make any sense, like outposts and storage limitations, or the clutter on the ship adding to the cargo weight for example. Maybe there devs working on 76 forgot how to design a single player experience, or maybe they had considered at one point having a Starfield 1st subscription with Starfield being a live service multiplayer game, but abandoned that idea early on, leaving in place a lot of weird MMO-like design choices that modders are forced to fix.
@@dannygleason5912 Outside of 76, starfield is fine. Its a different IP with a different approach. Its the audience that has changed. People dont like Bethesda style games anymore. Nothing short of them switching to a completely different play loop is going to satisfy people now.
@@FMBriggs Fallout 76, according to anonymous sources that have been correct about much information given, was a business move. A proposition, a necessary evil to get what they needed to support the single player games.
It feels like Bethesda has been trying to automate the process of creating "Bethesda magic" for as little effort and money as possible. And _this_ is the sum of all that effort, what a waste.
The only thing innovative about Starfield was their procedural generation. But it feels proceduraly generated. There are plenty of good games that generate maps that are good but Bethesda's latest efforts gutted the core features that make that magic as the price. After landing on 10 planets you realize that the uniqueness of the planets was just a facade as you enter the same raider outpost for the 3+ time. There are more issues like bugs or the story and quest treating you like you have an IQ of 60 but if that exploration "Bethesda magic" was there, I would have spent more time with this game.
@@Nickolia481Thats an observer issue. If people thought there was going handcrafted or stimulating content when just landing at a random point on a planet or moon, it shows that understanding is in short supply. Its fine for people to not know, as ignorance is the curse of life, but people speak and act as if they know exactly what is what. Games are smoke and mirrors and the goal is to sell the illusion of the games world.
@@sagearmaggedon7307 Seeing the same dungeon 3+ times on different planets shatters the illusion. Having handcrafted content on a planet in a galaxy with 1000 star systems might be unreasonable, but at least having the coding in place to simply set a dungeon aside after it’s used so it doesn’t pop back up again right away shouldn’t be that hard (simply put it in a list of “already used dungeons” that doesn’t get used again until the “dungeons not used” list has been exhausted). Also, if there’s too many planets to have handcrafted locations on every planet, maybe there’s too many planets. Outer Worlds had just one star system and a handful of planets, but every planet was handcrafted and felt more real for it. At the very least, Starfield’s core worlds should have been handcrafted. Exploring Jemison and having everything on it be randomized (including a settlement with one colonist talking about how good it was to be light years away from civilization- on Jemison) was ridiculous.
@@EyeOfMagnus4E201 It also shatters the illusion in cyberpunk, when I walk up to a door and cant go inside or when I talk to shadowheart at camp, she teleports from a meditative stance to magically standing up. Games have limitations, which is why illusions are needed in the first place. To help with the same locations issue, I have an idea. Maybe not land at random landing zones if you are not there for resources or to build stuff?….maybe…
@@sagearmaggedon7307 Perhaps, but if you’re trying to role-play as an explorer, with your survey, botany, and zoology skills maxed out like I was, it’s not a rewarding experience to find out that plants, creatures, and locations all look alike after a while. Of course, I guess I could just stop exploring, which I did, and I haven’t played the game for 11 months now, though I’m planning on going back just to see what the vehicle and Shattered Space are like myself, (if I can pull away from Skyrim and Stellaris).
It's disturbing that Emil and some other devs are pretending nothing's wrong when there clearly is. The reviews are bad, the sales are beneath what we'd expect from this studio, but you're happy with the response? What is happening in that studio???
@@Ball.Daily11Yes, but only for a moment. Back in November last year, Bethesda boasted about the total player count at 13.9m, which was pretty good. Then, around April(or March) this year, Bethesda boasted about the total player count again, but it was still around 13.9m. That can only mean right after the initial release, total unit sales just drop off the cliff and even game pass didn't even help boost it further.
The OGs who made Bethesda one of the best in the business are no longer working there and now the studio is a shadow of it's former self. If they were still around, I would have more confidence that TES6 would be a masterpiece worth looking forward to but instead, I'm worried about it.
Some of the worst writers, worst animators, and least creative developers in the rpg space. They basically depend on creation engine to basically “forge mode” games
@@alex1212456 Not necessarily, the aspects of the game are relative. If Bethesda created a more linear structured game, they would surpass other rpgs by a landslide in those departments you mention. Measure the aspects of a game in respect to the total game. For a game this large, the things you mentioned are “good”.
It's not just the writing. It's the delivery of the dialog. The scene is never acted out but instead It's always delivered in the same mono tone voice. I mean compare the delivery of the dialog between a Bethesda game and Witcher 3
0:39 Brother, there are plenty of people who don't play Bethesda games, but criticize them heavily. They are Bethesda's former fans that no longer feel like spending $70 to learn that Bethesda is still declining.
Really is sad how many formerly awesome game franchises, pillars of the industry, are either in ruins or completely dead. From my own gaming history.. Battlefield is on the ropes, Halo is on the ropes, TES and Fallout are on life support from modders, Far Cry is just re-skinned since 2012. I'm sure there are more but I can only handle so much depression lol.
The best missions were the ones like when you join the strikers gang, The mantis lair or Vanguard storyline. The problem with Starfield is most of the game could be fixed with a cell phone! If they created actual missions that made sense people would love it.
It's not just the writing, as in what the text says, but the whole writing design (I don't know the technical term for it). I remember a mission that really annoyed me, that Legrange guy in Neon. I told him over and over and over again in no uncertain terms I wanted nothing to do with him and he was like: come ooon, you'll change your mind and the game just put that mission in my quest log. I don't want to do it and I don't know why there isn't a clear way to reject some missions. They did this before in Fallout 4, where the only options were yes, very yes, sarcastic yes, and OMG! yes... This is really got on my nerves and it ruins the experience in role playing. I can't have a law abiding model citizen character, because the game now gets my character involved in drug dealing.
Emil is just beyond delusional. The toxic positivity this dude reeks of is obnoxious. "Best game we ever made" my ass. Usually I'm pretty civil and chill, but man I just can't stand this slap in the face. Emil is just shoving shit in our faces and telling us it smells good at this point.
@@vilek_7235 I think we've reached a point where even notoriously access-driven game journalists are just kinda done with Bethesda's bullshit, lol. Like, we've reached the point where even they're like, "What's that, Bethesda? You might blacklist us if we say mean things about you? You might not send us review copies of your future shitty-ass games? Oh... oh no... whatever shall we do if we're forced to play and review other, better games instead?"
Excuse me what? If 5 duds can make Valheim, if a small indie studio can make Enshrouded, if Mods can make a DLC like Follout London, and a AAA studio owned by 3 trillion USD company says Starfield is the best game they ever done? You're going Ubi route, good work.
@dn9156 It started with 2 people and they've actually released a hell of a lot since it's been out for as many people as it is. I played it from say one theres easily 2x the content there was at launch probably 3x honestly
I wish I loved Starfield more. But there was just to much random generation for me to really connect with it. Skyrim's setting was a character itself. Being able to wander around but also be grounded in the world with familiar landmarks dotting the horizon. In Starfield if I go to a random planet I just know its all random stuff. Really bursts the bubble of the fantasy. Also the irony is that the world in Starfield feels smaller because of it.
This. The random generation thing really killed the game in every sort of way possible. Hand crafted locations is Bethesda's bread and butter; and they should've stuck to that
Yeah, worlds make no sense, like a road between buildings or outposts. Find a trail, leads to a waterfall or anything. Starfield “We don’t do that, we just have empty” complete success 😅 or just spend the game in the menu fast travelling across the universe which has zero adventure.
I don't think Matty means that we don't want to be immersed and feel like we are part of the world. He's referring to the idea of being able to do every piece of content on one character as well as never ending procedural generation making sure you never need to make a new character. What really makes a game feel like it's possible to live in is that finality, in addition to having various gameplay styles and story beats that are limited based on your choices. The idea is that you can replay the game as a good or evil or somewhere inbetween character "this time i'll make this decision in that quest rather than that" and that having an effect. And the varying playstyles being different enough to warrant multiple playthroughs.
I think it's a bit of both. I want to have a game so large that when I replay it I see things I missed the first time. But I also want to have the ability to affect the things I did the first time in different ways in the form of choice and consequence. If I had a simple and short game with 10 major choice and consequences and nothing else, I would feel cheated. With Skyrim I can have the hundreds of dungeons and locations, as well as a variety of outcomes for major quests that I will almost certainly take on each character playthrough. The endless content is most important with loot. I never want to feel like I have the best sword or armor, because then there is literally no incentive to keep going.
Some people may want to forever live in the game world... me? I just want to see everything then roll credits after.... After 5 years pass maybe I'll return and make a few different decisions.
It's funny that the lesson they took from Fallout 3 was "players don't want the game to ever end", and they quickly DLCed the death ending out, when a year later Obsidian did the exact same "final ending" thing in New Vegas. Then they DIDN'T undo it with DLCs. And for all the faults New Vegas had on release, the ending was one thing I never saw complaints about. Bethesda never seems to take into account WHY things get criticized. "This element failed, so the entire idea of that element was bad" seems to be as far as their understanding ever goes. They never appear to consider that maybe their implementation of it was bad.
100% this is cut content that they polished up to sell it as DLC. I cannot honestly believe they looked at this, and then they looked at Phantom Liberty and said "Yeah, our DLC is definitely worth 30$".
Speaks volumes, I'm probably at 1600 hrs across all versions of Skyrim (PS3 and PC) and based on the reviews I've seen have yet to touch Starfield. I'll probably end up getting the "directors cut" at a deep discount someday though.
Ive played fallout 4 for 1657 hours, about 1200+ hours of that was modded content. I never need to play another bethesda game ever again knowing how copy + paste they can be.
I'm just bummed out that Bethesda has no intention to innovate or change in any capacity. They kind of seem to have the Ubisoft toxic positivity issue where any criticism is being shut down. It's frustrating. They are going to be their own end if they don't innovate. People want new and interesting gameplay, stories, etc.
I was saying the same thing comparing them to ubisoft. They think they can't do any wrong. These companies need to be humbled. Maybe they'll return to the glory days
@@TitusKingdom they have lost their drive to write good compelling stories and have gameplay that fits the narrative, all they want to do is cobble together the same old tired mechanics, the same boring stories, even more boring dungeons. It just sucks man. I want to like Bethesda but they make it impossible. I feel about them the way I feel about Ubisoft. If they don't make an effort to change and grow then they deserve whatever fate their studio faces.
How can Bethesda be so ignorant. They are just flat out ignoring their consumers and think they can’t do anything wrong, how does the worst performing and worst reviewed game they have, make them think it’s the “best game they’ve ever made”
My theory: Bethesda is hampered by the egos of the few at the top, who probably had very little to do with the bulk of the writing in pre fallout 4 bethesda. The actual writers have left, and they can't deliver what they used to. Starfield has such a limited imagination. It feels so limited and dull.
@@KeithElliott-zd8cx Yeah that's where the egos at the top come in. They seem to have never hired anyone who can write better than themselves since the early days. Just a theory. Because as you say, this hasn't happened to every company. Bethesda is a unique enigma to me. How did they get so bad?
The problem is that BGS think they are still on the top in terms of quality and games. That's not the case anymore. It was 10 years back. It might be a bit harsh but I think Bethesda is now a strong AA studio.
Its literally the same stuff. I heard someone mention the industry has surpassed Bethesda. Me: how exactly? When Bethesda launched an rpg, there was always another RPG that did do many things better than them. Mass effect 1 to oblivion is what witcher 3 is to fallout 4. Mass effect 2 is to skyrim what BG3 is to starfield. Remember Dragon Age origins vs fallout 3? Remember Dark Souls, Dragons dogma? Alot of games did so many things at a higher level than Bethesda. So what changed? The audience. Consumers are devolving further each year, and companies adapting practices to make up for these deficiencies has been labled and call advancement or “Its 2024 get with the times.” People are in a perception trap and dont even realize it.
They are simply delusional now. Todd himself in Matty interview raves how his tech team is ''moving along'' with improvements to creation engine and how they are doing a ''great job''. And it echos what BGS always say, they really believe their tech is adequate. Dude, while your engine is moving along, the rest of the industry flashes forward, they ran away and left you in the dust so back its sad, moving along is not good enough, you are so behind industry standards its insane. Their devs calling Starfield technical marvel is simply laughable statement. Its a technical sadness, patched together on loading screens, doesn't even work on HDD, dude, you are so up your asses it is sad. Yeah, your graphics, combat and writing always sucked balls. But it was cool you had dynamic worlds where NPCs trully lived and were greatly simulated, you could loot everything from them, no crappy random drops, you can take everything from the corpse apart their underwear. Leveling system was good. 15 years ago it was good enough to stand out, now look where the industry is, you are still making 2010 games when industry making 2024 games.
To be blunt, they were never on top in terms of quality. Their UI has always been bad, leveling systems usually poorly done, games were usually bug-ridden, and so on. They were just kind of alone in creating a wide world with lots of content, lots of little details. And these things led to a lot of passionate gamers, including some who dove into modding to add still more. But Bethesda never learned from their mistakes. They just made more of the same, except maybe dumbing something down, and using those saving to try and add some new monetization scheme instead.
Dude just because a game gets a lot of bad reviews it doesn't mean it's a "review bomb". That implies it isn't true. That's just a catch phrase to pretend the bad reviews are fake. This DLC was obviously done before the game came out so not much has changed but the price tag certainly doesn't help for something this low quality.
He meant it that way. He said that many people went to review bomb the DLC right when it was launched. And that is true. Starfield has incredibly high amount of passionate haters. Yes, the DLC is low quality and the main game is mid. But there *are* fake negative reviews.
No kidding, someone can spend 40 hours building a car, but if that car sucks and barely runs, the car is crap. Doesn't matter how much heart you put into it. Edit: 40 hours is probably not a great time frame into a car, more like 40 months lol.
His work is not bad because a person dislikes it, most people dislike it because the work is bad. His work IS bad and Emil can not write nor take criticism. @ReaperCet
Seeing the sad state of starfeild and now its failed redemption. I think its safe to say Bethesda needs to clean out their creative leads, because they clearly dont have what they used to, and its becoming more and more of a detriment.
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xh I think shutting them down is a little too far lol. I’m no Bethesda fan, not really a fan of any of their games, but this does look like an issue of not wanting to change. They seem slow in advancing / evolving their design philosophies. I believe that there are talented developers working there but they fall victim to mismanagement & poor leadership. Starfield felt like they had too many ideas but didn’t dig deep enough into any of them.
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xhLook, you're evidently a child, but things aren't that simply. There's need to be changes but there's nuance here that has to be taken into account.
Everything I've heard about Pagliarulo is that he's an incompetent who's managed to fail his way upwards into a lead role that's been observably detrimental to the games over time. He's basically lead writer _and_ designer on most Bethesda titles now and I can't speak to the design side of things, but taking a deep dive into the guy's writing is wild. He has ideas that sound cool on paper, at least sometimes, but then has absolutely no idea how to tie cause and effect together in a way that gels with reality or believable character motivations. The timeline definitely fits, too. He had a small role in Morrowind's DLC, was more involved in Oblivion, and became lead writer for Fallout 3 and Skyrim. Now, I like all of those games, but if nothing else the finer points of the writing got observably _dumber_ along that particular stretch and haven't improved since -- with the exception of New Vegas, which of course wasn't made by Bethesda. And that seems to remain a real sore point for them with regards to how they handle their IP now.
Elderscrolls 6 is cooked. It's not the graphics that kills this game, it's not the bugs, its the completely cringe awful writing and supremely uninspired ideas that cause starfield to have absolutely no soul.
To be fair, they learned how to maximize their return of investment. Cut all content out and let them pay for small chunks. Make the chunks as small as possible and as expensive as possible. As todd said people buy everything 😢. They learned how to make procedural content and sell it.
I am baffled as to how Emil Pagliarulo still has a job. His best work is well behind him, his current work a parody of his past glories. I'm calling it. ESVI is going to be a soul crushing disappointment.
I am praying to every higher power that you are wrong and that Bethesda locks in and delivers a masterpiece after all these years. The waiting can’t be for nothing man…😭
Tbh, with how the climate within the gaming space is these days I don't see a sceneraio where any studio could make a sequel to Skyrim that won't be met with a lot of criticism. People's expectations are so huge and so clearly defined that if the final product deviates just a little from that, and we all know it will, people are going to be dissapointed. The broader audience and those are the ones who will be the loudest don't even want an ES6. What they really want is Skyrim 2 and they won't get that.
Past glories? Fetch quest and extremely short guild quests. Oblivion did it right. The guild’s missions in that game were great. In Skyrim they were awful. The Thieves Guild was okay but everything else was as crap.
@@afungusamungus2860 haha you’re not wrong. The worst part is it was a moon on the system map that had a marker shown for a cave. Not just a randomly generated one. I literally spent 15 minutes wandering the same little bit over and over again to see if I missed anything. Nope. Just a dead man on a cave in with 300ish credits. I was pissed lol
The quests should’ve been just on a handful of handcrafted planets and then all the others planets should be POI on a reduced scale. Also the other planets should just be for outposts and research. This would’ve been great as it would have given us a concentrated place to “live “ like Skyrim and fallout but you can venture out to the depths of space for some purpose if you want.
@@gary1488 I was really hoping the modding scene would help but the game is just so boring nobody cares to make it better. I did like the faction quests and main quest but all the side side content is pathetic. Especially in comparison to Skyrim or oblivion or morrowind. Morrowind had same-y style tombs and caves etc but they had much better stuff to find and enemies to encounter. Starfield has almost nothing
@@gary1488 I can’t disagree. I think they were expecting the same level of modding that Skyrim has and that’s not going to be the case. I really wanted to love it but a single play through for my love of BGS is enough. I’m stoked for the wayward realms!
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xh Yes they were. For a while, they were the best at open world rpg games. Nobody came close. Even now, years later, no open world rpg has been as successful as Skyrim or been able to replicate it's formula. Their recent "failures" won't change that fact. That said. They need new blood and alot of revaluation if they wanna compete in the modern gaming world. Starfield had the potential to be a great game, but lacks alot of features and is ultimately too shallow. It's still redeemable, but they are gonna need to give us alot of big updates with new features and mechanics.
@@deandoesstuff3371skyrim sucks lol... Tons of open world games are MUCH MUCH better. Skyrim is unplayable after playing masterpieces like witcher 3.. Cyberpunk 2077.. Ghost of tsusima. Skyrim is slop for normies
Emil's interview is a *really* bad look, and it pretty much confirms that Bethesda are in an echo chamber and completely out of touch. Sure social media is cancer, but it seems a lot of peoples reaction to that is to circle the wagons and delude themselves with positivity.
its amazing how so many people treat social media as the ONLY FORM of communication? We had forums back in the day, it was so much more meaningless to troll and talk shit to devs when you had to go into their own forums where they could ban you.
Emil has been sucking his own ego dry for over a decade. The man is immune to criticism and will proclaim his works as career highlights while the public at large thinks they are the worst part of the game. I knew the moment Emil had not been fired from Bethesda when the Starfield announcement hit the writing was going to be bad. The fact he has still managed to stay is borderline nepotism.
@@unlimitedgamerworks6125 Despite him being on the team I was willing to give Starfield a chance. Surely he finally learned to listen to comments from Fallout 4, but surely ther overall comments about 76? I have like 250+ hours in Starfield. And the worst thing I can say is I wish I could refund the time I put into it.
@@KeytarArgonianNeil Druckmann is a great developer lmao just because you don’t like 1 divisive sequel he made doesn’t take away from the fact that everything he has worked on has been a 9+/10
@@calwu8252 Neil Druckman didn’t even come up with the concept of the last of us. He came on to development of TLoU later than everyone else than gave himself the full credit in the shows credits. Absolute hack. There’s a reason the 2nd game was divisive.
The main problem for me is the exploration. I've played every BGS game since Morrowind, and they always had a knack for crafting environments I enjoyed walking around in, looking at things, and discovering stuff like caves or structures or landmarks. I felt immersed. With Starfield, the environments are bland because they're procedurally generated with landmarks procedurally plopped down kind of uniformly all over the place rather than handcrafted with attention to detail. Before the game released, my idea of what the game would be was kind of like Mass Effect where you have the main planets you visit with smaller, handcrafted maps and then the procedural generation parts would be where you go if you want to farm loot or mine resources and build outposts. From the way things were described it sounded like there was a separation between the handcrafted stuff and procedural stuff. Like, Mass Effect you had the main planets and then you had the more bland maps where you drive around with the Mako. The procedural stuff would be like the Mako maps where it's a separate thing from the main game. At the same time, it annoys me that there aren't any planets or moons that are just empty. EVERY planet and moon, even the most barren and "lifeless" ones, have random outposts scattered around and ships landing and encounters with npcs and enemies. It feels like everything's already been explored by someone. There's never a planet or moon where I feel like I'm the first person to take a step on it. Whole galaxy's already discovered and settled to the last inch apparently. It's like you said in the last video. The "discovery" isn't there.
Yup, thats my main problem with Starfield...As much as I wanna like it it's just okay to me. The exploration is the biggest and most important miss of the game. I dont like wandering at all in Starfield when you just continue to see the same locations recycled over and over. The gameplay loop also gets tedious. "Fast travel here, fast travel there" It constantly takes the immersion out of the game. The scope of the game was simply just too big and they bit off more than they can chew. Its ironic though, Starfield is supposed to be their "biggest game" but it feels like their smallest compared to the predecessors. Starfield is a mile wide and an inch deep is the best way I can explain it. It's not bad, but its dissapointing when you know what could have been if they stuck to what made them great.
I got the same problem with No Man's Sky too. I got bored of that too after like 50hrs. Same planets too, very minor variance of materials to gain , but all are populated and littered with outposts and aliens doing stuff.
I think Shattered Space shows why you shouldn't sell a DLC before the base game even ships. Both Erdtree and Phantom Liberty took two years to get out the door. And I have to imagine a lot of that time was spent conceptualizing and listen to feedback about the base games. With Starfield it seems like BGS faced some truly unsolvable problems, and the DLC was less a passion and more an obligation they already sold to people. The biggest smoking gun for me has got to be that price tag. I think anyone that takes pride in their work would either spend more time to put out a longer expansion, or cut the price at least a little.
Problem is, they can't really cut the price much, because they pre-sold the expansion with the base game. Really, they needed to put effort into the expansion, not just to redeem Starfield, but to keep hype up or at least somewhat restore it for ES6. Like it needed to do things like have meaningful choices, revamp melee combat, add a ton of new PoI variants or a new system that can actually generate random building/cave interiors for them. And a bunch of that stuff, while it could launch with the DLC, should be just a patch for the main game. But, well, the patches they released for Starfield made it pretty clear they were not going to put any real effort into addressing the game's issues. "here, have a vehicle so you can not bother exploring, because it is still pointless".
There is a trend in Triple A Gaming where you have these studios heads, leaders, executive overindulge in this unjustified optimism with a head in the sand mentality. Not saying all internet criticism is constructive or authentic but to ignore a bad reception as big as this, and continue on this trodden path is so freaking frustrating. They don't want to change, they are very content with how the conduct their business and make their games.
I gotta feel sad for Matty, seeing a studio he loves falling to pieces. It's what I went through with Bioware. I was into Bioware from BG1, and even gave them a pass on Andromeda. But it was clearly their direction. We'll see how the next ME goes. The new DA looks, rough....feels like they just amplified DA:I, which I couldn't get into.
I feel this, loved the old bg games back in the day and haven't enjoyed their releases lately. I had to force myself to finish inquisition after starting it three different times.
@@justme87999 It's all subjective, but remember, to a lot of people Fallout 4 was a letdown, with its 4 choice dialogue. Take that off the chart though, and you have FO76 and Starfield. While Starfield wasn't nearly as rough, it wasn't the comeback that BGS needed after FO76. Likewise, Bioware only had one 'bad' game, but, just like with Bethesda, it was back to back with another let-down title.
This really reeks of the "toxic positivity" problem being talked about in modern game dev studios... They're so out of touch with what people actually want from their games.
Bethesda needs to shake up some leadership positions. It doesn't seem like anybody in power there has enough vision to SEE that their design is stale- let alone to steer it in a better direction. Not to mention, putting The Elder Scrolls on the backburner for 13+ years was an unbelievably poor decision. BGS knew that even if they only focused on TES and Fallout, there was guaranteed to be a nearly 10 year gap between new releases for each respective franchise. Faced with that sobering reality, leadership at BGS decided to add ANOTHER major IP to their juggling routine and spent a few years making a mediocre multiplayer game. Bruh.
I kept Starfield on my Series X since launch since I knew an expansion was coming. Following me beating Shattered Space in the short amount of time it is, I promptly uninstalled the game. If they were looking for their Far Harbor moment, they failed. It did the opposite for me, I decided to more than likely be done with Starfield for good.
@@GangstarComputerGod I played the main story as well as all the major faction stories, but I had no interest in doing any exploration from planet to planet. They were all too similar, bland, and those constant loading screens slowed the process. I initially walked away thinking the game was ‘fine’, and now a year later this DLC has done nothing to improve my view of the game
@@landoncopenhaver I’m not sure how many hours I put in because I actually uninstalled it, but it wasn’t a small amount. I just know that at one point I realized I was so bored I didn’t even care what happened. I had no desire to get another spinny thing, I knew there was nothing new on any planet, and the cities were small and had no interesting people or quests. I was so bummed. I’m fairly certain this DLC was cut from the game because that faction always seemed like a huge hole in the “universe” of the game. Their willingness to make their games worse to keep selling pieces off in a slow drip is going to sink BGS.
I might be done with all of Bethesda at this point. I don’t think I’m even gonna give their newer games a chance when they come out, unless there are just overwhelmingly positive reviews. I think I’m no longer a fan. Kind of disappointed to say that.
That snippet from Emil at 7:49 is just stunning. BGS is so high on their own supply it's ridiculous. Skyrim did so well that they've been in this "who cares how good the game actually is, they'll buy whatever we release. modders will fix it anyway" mentality ever since. BGS might be one of if not *the* worst dev studio in the industry, today. They're shockingly out of touch and delusional and behind the curve. There is absolutely no way ES6 will be any good. It will just be more slop that releases a generation or two too late.
Yeah, bgs went wrong when they started thinking they can focus on “passion projects” like starfield instead of making the games the fans want. To be fair I think it’s an entertainment industry as a whole problem. Movies, shows and games studios have been making what they want rather than any focus on customers and worse when they fail they blame the customers and refuse to take any criticism at all.
Toxic positivity from these developers about their own games is killing the gaming industry…this has honestly killed my whole hype about the Elder Scrolls 6 in its entirely.
I don't know if to Obsidian, but yes, to someone else. I noticed this about a lot of gamers, something I don't get. Why do they pay so much attention to specific studios? Or when you see Bioware, Bethesda, Blizzard, Ubisoft, all making good games at one point, but declining over time, it seems to me people shouldn't place so much emphasis on studios. I like Bethesda games, like Skyrim or Fallout 4, but I can't say I'm necessarily a fan of the studio itself or of specific people, like Howard. There is no perfect studio, just studios that haven't failed yet.
I love Starfield and gave it a positive review. I am a fanboy with hundreds of hours in the game. Yet I just gave Shattered Space a negative review after 100%'ing all achievements and finishing it. I left the expansion feeling bewildered: "that's it?" I completed it in just two afternoon play sessions. I took my time. I clicked through all the dialogue, completed every quest, explored random POIs, did some bounty board stuff, checked out the other planets, everything. I even got the hidden unique armor set that people haven't caught on about yet. Two afternoons to 100% it. No new ship parts. 4 of the 6 new weapons are re-skins. The 2 new companions are just basic crew without story quests. No new skill magazines to collect. No new powers or abilities. No new systems of any kind. All their other DLCs have expanded upon the base game, whether it's vampire lord and crossbows, or playing as a raider, whatever. Shattered Space does nothing. A mundane story to beat over a weekend and forget about.
The lack of new content here is truly baffling. How are there no unique armor and weapons? Why haven't we gotten any new powers from this eldritch horror-themed world? Why is Andreja, of all people, barely speaking about what's going on? Either the budget for this was ridiculously small or they were just being straight-up lazy. I usually hesitate to call developers that because I know how taxing it can be to work in this industry, but the sheer lack of effort and creativity leaves me little choice. Compare this to Far Harbor or any other major DLC they've done. They couldn't even manage to recreate that. My last shred of faith in this game is slowly crumbling away.
And then you consider that it took them a full year to release. For all their other games, they'd finish releasing their entire set of DLC within a year. They've taken longer than it took to make the entirety of all Fallout 4 DLC, and this is all they could put together?
Are all achievements obtainable in one play through without backup saves? Or is it like Far Harbour where different quest ones require different choices and therefore multiple play throughs / tactical manual saves.
Bethesda puts more effort in Skyrim to this day then starfield. And it makes no sense. You have a great template to work with. Space exploration. Where the hell are the aliens. Where are the different species on each planet. Where is the weapon variety based on the planet’s technology. I mean jeez they can make this such a good game if they had some imagination.
Todd Howard described "Starfield" as "Skyrim in space" during an interview, emphasizing that it incorporates elements familiar to fans of Bethesda's games, such as character customization and a robust skill system. He noted that "you’re gonna see those hallmarks in anything we do that is kind of a mainline Bethesda game."
@@refugeehugsforfree4151 customization? Skyrim had different species of people you can be. Argonians. High elf’s. Khajit. Orcs. Starfield is nothing at all like Skyrim except the way you level up. You walk through white run and see nords, imperials. Elf’s. Orcs. It has way more than starfield. Shit even fallout 4 had more. There’s no reason starfield can’t have that same variety. And if it’s supposed to be like Skyrim it should have these things.
@@Soothsayrtw Well Todd said it was, aka he lied to us all. "Skyrim in Space" has so much heavy weight to it. He knew what he was doing. Lying to his overly loyal and zealous fanbase. I Pre ordered 76 at the promise of a Coop\online Fallout, played the Beta, found out it was you doing quests by yourselves and hoping they line up with the people you play with, and you take the same amount of time and don't DC. Canceled the preorder (Highest$ Version) never looked back at Bethesda again. I'm done forever. Maybe till fallout 5 goes on sale.
Ya it’s actually sad that they have the tried and tested template of Skyrim and fallout and all they have to do was add a space theme the team is so uncreative space is the easiest thing to fucking write for and they blow it
That's not criticism tho...This is just a subjective take. Bethesda went with a more "realistic" or grounded approach. Kinda like The Expanse or Dune...If you want sapient aliens, there's plenty of other space games to play. They need to improve their base game and add more features. That's the problem. Not the lack of aliens ( which are in the game btw, just not sapient ).
Its crazy I first found this channel pre-Fallout 4. I used to watch your videos of community ideas for Fallout 4 and what you wanted to be in the game. 10 years later and you're still here lmao. Keep up the good work Matty, your content is always getting better and you present your thoughts/ideas like a true journalist. I always come to you for Fallout/Bethesda news first!!
I loved starfield and give the base game a 8/10. I loved the ship building, I enjoyed a lot of the storylines like the vanguard missions and the crimson fleet missions, but I did see the flaws and some of the loading screens and lack of exploration was a let down for sure. But I like Bethesda games almost like comfort food. I just enjoy the feel of their games. After a long day I enjoy a slightly more “boring” game where I can put my controller down and just hear the music and the vibe and jump in and out of playing the game and have the more casual experience these games give Shattered space was fun in parts for me but it definitely was a let down when Todd hyped it up as in the level of far harbor. The game just needs a couple devs who want to have more fun. There’s no little Easter eggs or cool ideas thrown in. The game feels corporate board meeting made… The dlc feels like it was generated by an A.I. there’s just a lack of human soul in it, hard to explain tbh
You know.. Having those barriers make for a better game in my opinion. Great example being i'm playing Morrowind and i can't side with House Redorran or House Hlaalu because i want to be Telvanni, i also can't be a part of the theives guild (in my playthrough) because i'm part of the fighters guild. I didn't even like it in Skyrim where you could just.. beeee everything! it meant nothing. Take the Mages Guild for example, what's the point in being archmage? just don't end it with me being archmage 😮
Oh... Things like that would give so much more meaning for NG+. Getting locked out from Freestar rangers questline, because the character is a pirate or a UC vanguard would actually inspire people to chose a different faction in NG+. As I remember Morrowind was their last when the game said "no" to the player and rejected the character based on skill-checks or reputation. People could still "improve the skills" to get in to a certain guild or create a new character with stats better fitting for that guild, but that was time consuming or needed a new character. Nowadays, with the attention spawn of the current generation, studios are expecting the majority of the players to play and finish the game only once. So these lockout mechanism got dropped in order to "not be boring" for those players or "not lock them out of content" in their first (and only) play-trough.
@@szabolcskecskes There is specifically a great thing I want to add to where you said that this is the last game that Bethesda said "no" to the player (Which I'm making a cool mod for to expand upon). There's a pop up when you OFF an ESSENTIAL character. "With this character's death, the thread of prophecy is severed. Restore a saved game to restore the weave of fate, or persist in the doomed world you have created." They actually integrated lore into the save files, and loading, there are multiple timelines being managed by Hermeous Mora and so many lead to that said doomed world so only one will be able to manifest itself; The save file your character is currently loaded on. There is sooo many things in my opinion that they've severed in the name of a populated service model instead of a video game.
@@szabolcskecskes It's absolutely an artificial locking out of content, yes. Because you can use your own mind to decide you don't want to be a member of Dark Brotherhood.
Why are people acting like Bethesda don’t want Starfield to be like Fallout or Elder Scrolls. It has the exact same gameplay loop, but it’s just not done as well.
Todd Howard described "Starfield" as "Skyrim in space" during an interview, emphasizing that it incorporates elements familiar to fans of Bethesda's games, such as character customization and a robust skill system. He noted that "you’re gonna see those hallmarks in anything we do that is kind of a mainline Bethesda game."
Definitely think the loop is significantly different... Or at least how the loop feels is.... That is, how you explore and discover points of interests/quests in the game.
@@carrasco3001 Your comment made me realize something. I don't know if their game engine can support exploration on that scale for it to be good. I'm no expert, so don't quote me on this, but it seems to me their engine is good at micro stuff, as in making every object on a table interactable (is that a word?) But I think taking that and scaling it up can't be done considering how many small objects it would need to track. And so, they had to have small locations divided by loading screens, which causes an issue with exploration when you're talking about entire stellar systems. I suspect their engine can work well with a Skyrim or Fallout sized worlds, but not on a larger scale, so they had to compensate either with emptiness OR copy-pasted content. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect the engine simply wouldn't be able support thousands of interesting POIs with all the stuff in them, without breaking the world into much smaller pieces.
I really thought Shattered Space might be the moment that made me feel some fomo for not playing Starfield, but instead it's a reminder I made the right decision to pass on this game. And I wish that wasn't the case.
This is gonna sound harsh to Bethesda but two things. They should really take player feedback to heart like you said. They also should really truly use RDR2 as a North Star. It’s kinda sad that Rockstar Games managed craft an open world that feels just as alive and in-depth as some of BGS’s recent RPG’s. Like it’s genuinely weird to me that RDR2 is technically a better RPG than Starfield or any recent BGS release. Hell even the modding scene, the one thing that BGS has clung onto is now not their exclusive corner anymore. I don’t know how none of these compounding elements whether it’s developers outperforming them on a simulation level like with Red Dead Redemption 2 or the modding scene just outgrowing them with games like Cyberpunk, Witcher 3, BG3, and Doom Eternal. These moments should really push BGS to do better but somehow they remain really stagnant in an industry that’s moving so rapidly.
I like to live in Bethesdas game worlds. I beat Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skyrim, and FO4 once each. I have put more time into their games than any other studio, played thousands of hours into their games, made hundreds of characters always burning out at some point and getting bored. I don’t finish them because I don’t want to necessarily engage with their story. I want to create my own story in the world they made. I think a huge player base does like to ‘live’ in these worlds.
When you stop Buying they will start Trying. The acceptance of low quality buggy products is starting to decline which is the best thing that could happen for us gamers. Its not only Bethesda but this one hurts the more because of my history with their games.
Why should we care about game development difficulties? Like, do you care how hard is it to make a new porcessors or video cards? No, you just want a good one. The same should be for games.
Bethesda has become the pathetic 45 year old man that peaked in high school and still wears his varsity jacket....except instead of high school its Skyrim
I'll be honest, I tried replaying Skyrim yesterday and after Starfield, IDK, I'm just not feeling it anymore. I get a short impulse to return, but after a few hours I'm no longer attracted to the Bethesda formula. It has potential, "go anywhere, be whoever you want to be" is a great concept still. But the formula needs to evolve and in Starfield, it didn't evolve enough. I liked Starfield, but it felt like it could/should have been so much more.
@@octavianpopescu4776 Yeah, to be fair I played Skyrim and FO4 for a long time modded and unmodded. Now if I load up either I get past the starting areas, in Skyrim I head to a location and FO4 I head to Sanctuary or beeline to Diamond City and then I basically just tune out, tab and watch stuff and close the game shortly after. Starfield I was doing that after 30 hours when I realised there are 10 different POIs, shipbuilding was utterly uninspired and the main story is just a fetch quest. What BGS needs is to get rid of Todd and Emil, they are almost certainly responsible for their games being insanely boring.
9:50 this is a point I totally disagree with Matty on. I love the idea of Bethesda focusing on "simulations" that you can "live in" that is what I want from a fantasy game. The problem is their execution in recent years. (Ideally you can have the best of both things btw)
Well sadly then, the BGS games aren't for you. BGS games were never about life SIM and making them into such will just make them another generic life SIM slop
@@mikekuzmicz8408 False. I've been doing this since Morrowind. Its the reason I fell in love with Bethesda games. I had over 400 hours on one character in Morrowind and it's been about the same in every game. I do create other characters, but that's to play as a different roles. I play these games because I feel like I can live in the world for months or longer. There are whole modding communities built around building homes farms and "Sim Settlements" to live in.
@@mikekuzmicz8408 Lol, well it looks like they are for me based on what the people who run the company are saying :) but to be clear I never said I wanted a "life sim," but a world that at least feels like you can "live in." There is a difference.
Skyrim was the last game where I made excuses and acceptions to their games being buggy, unfinished and watered down rpgs that focus more on action and exploration more than a good story or good rpg mechanics
I do want to live in their worlds, but the level of simulation is so shallow that any attempt to immerse myself has me bouncing off the bottom when I'm only ankle deep. The shops no longer had hours, NPCs no longer have schedules, every NPC stares at me like I have pie on my face. It''s such a weird feeling going through Starfield and being able to just see how the entire thing was designed around the player character instead of starting as a believable world. Also I still can't believe they changed the weapon mod system from Fallout 4 so you can't loot or buy mods, you have to use the crafting system. Completely ruins a scavenger style playthrough for me.
Mods. That's the only reason why people play these games. Bethesda needs to make their base games Free since they let Modders actually do the post development anyway.. sure charge for DLC and Bigger Mods Creators but make the base game Free.
Wait, make the game free and pay for mods? Instead of the way it's always been, buy a game once and mod it for years for free? You're a Bethesda employee, aren't you? 'Cause that's a pretty anti-gamer attitude ya got there. Give me Nexus mods any day over paid mods. $20 for a gun, lol.
Nah the reason I bought Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fallout 4 and Skyrim was for the vanilla games not mods. The reason I go back to most of those games nowadays is partly because of the mods. If people only played those games because of mods then the games would've flopped on consoles which didn't have mod support.
Nonsense. Skyrim is great - even now in 2024 - without mods. This idiotic excuse that mods keep those games surviving must stop. Majority of Skyrim players have never used any mods. We modders are a small community. Please, get out of your bubble.
We do want to live in these worlds because is more fun to play the game as a sandbox than an RPG, and that fact is because of the main story is poorly written and doesn't compels you to follow it to try to know what will happen IMO. We all know that the side quest at far way better that the main story, which usually is more an excuse to play the game rather than an interesting story.
No Mans Sky has been on the market 5+ years. Starfield has been on the market for 1 year. Don't you think 4+ years is a lot more time to develop content? Not making excuses, but that is a dumb argument.
@@Kris.G But Starfield is a wide, shallow puddle for people who can't be bothered to figure out what better game to play, so they just settle for one of the most meh games ever to have been created. Stuff is there, surface level polish, but nothing more. It's an exploration game without exploration, a shooter without interesting enemies or weapons that relies on bullet sponge for "difficulty", an RPG without choices, interesting characters or good stories... it's just consistently, across the board, just below average.
@@Axterix13 and which of these aspects does NMS improve on? The only, obvious one is the exploration without loading screens. Apart from that, Starfield does everything better. NMS is (not even) a shooter without interesting enemies, not an rpg, no choices or interesting characters or good stories, it's just consistently, across the board, just below average. It's a walking simulator for people who like to collect resources and look at a procedurally generated colour-fest.
Shattered Space was another faction city, like Akhila or Atlantis or Neon or the Key. With a similar amount of side content. If Bethesda were realistic about this, and its value (max 1/4 of the base game), people would be less disappointed.
Using steam charts for primarily an Xbox game is always weird to me. There’s thousands upon thousands playing on Xbox, for free too with game pass. Just an odd thing to use for player reference.
Keep in mind that a 10k for Fallout 76 is massively more beneficial financially for BGS than any other BGS game, because they’ve been killing it with the Atom Shop and people must be throwing so much money at BGS weekly. I was a Fallout 76 hater myself, but I let its claws sink deeply into me somehow, and now I can’t quit playing it for many unforeseen or not-so-obvious reasons. Send help, Matty!
I might be in the minority, but I do appreciate the ability to "live in the world" in a Bethesda games. I genuinely think radiant quests are a great feature of a Bethesda game... in theory. I think a game like Elder Scrolls should have endlessly recurring generic bounty missions, just for example, because that allows you to further immerse yourself in that "life"... BUT the problem is Bethesda at some point thought that the endless randomized filler was what people liked their games for. Radiant quests are a nice addition, but they aren't why I bought the game. The hand crafted content should ALWAYS come first. With Starfield, they basically just let their randomizer make the entire game while they dotted in little pockets of disconnected REAL content, much of which was small scale nothing-burger quests or just plain boring. None of the factions feel real or fleshed out, none of the planets MEAN ANYTHING to the larger picture. It's basically a wallpaper generator with amateurish entry level missions placed randomly throughout.
They’ve been lost since Skyrim. It’s a fact. And they act like it’s because our standards are too high when it’s literally them ripping any and all rpg elements. And they actually think that’ll make them more money.
10:58 I mean, I do like living in the world, especially when I get to customize my apartment or settlements in the game. Takes me a while to make it exactly exactly the way I want it.
I don't have the patience or imagination for interior/exterior design which makes this aspect of Bethesda games unappealing to me. I love the fact the ship habs are pre designed otherwise I'd be flying empty husks. Because if you're not into building outposts, then the living thing in Starfield is rather pointless.
Can I just say, as much as people hate Starfield and Shattered space, I thought the introduction to the DLC was really good. The Oracle space station was such a cool location, both in terms of its atmosphere and as a dungeon. I wish Starfield had more locations like it. It makes me realize that, despite being a Bethesda title, Starfield is woefully lacking when it comes to dungeons, and especially good dungeons with atmosphere, environmental storytelling, puzzles, and verticality.
Todd Howard described "Starfield" as "Skyrim in space" during an interview, emphasizing that it incorporates elements familiar to fans of Bethesda's games, such as character customization and a robust skill system. He noted that "you’re gonna see those hallmarks in anything we do that is kind of a mainline Bethesda game."
Starfield could be Bethesda's crown jewel if they want it to be. They just have to put in the effort to make quality updates and content. This could be talked about the same way we talk about Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky.
The fact that many of us visited Nuka World or Far Harbor recently says...EVERYTHING. Or replayed Danse's romance dialogue just to watch those gorgeous brown eyes widen in disbelief when he asks, "You love me?" OR my personal favorite, "Where do you want me?"
The fact you interviewed Todd recently and now calling out Bethesda speaks volume. Most people wouldn’t dare to get on a company’s bad side in fear of being blacklisted for good, but you’re still taking the risk to keep your authenticity. Honestly, big respect
Todd said in the interview that he appreciates Matty for the disposition he has. That he values the criticism.
😏
Guaranteed Todd agreed to Matty's interview because Matty is fair. Fair means praise OR criticism when either is earned.
Personally, I love Starfield, but there is no doubt it is insanely polarizing.
Bethesda needs honest feedback. How they respond will show a lot.
@@xandolio865 This. Like, it's clear Starfield has flaws...Alot of flaws even. But it's not a bad game. It's still redeemable with more updates and more content/features. It definitely deserves the criticism it gets. But alot of people are just following the hate train without any real feedback.
I don’t want to live in their worlds, I want their worlds to feel like they’re living despite my not being there.
Yes! The world _feels_ like an amusement park.
Which Skyrim had to a certain extent. NPCs had day to day activities etc. It's so sad to see what has happened to Bethesda.
Damn that was deep. That was a huge part of what made Oblivion seem to wildly ahead of other games was the radiant AI making it seem like the NPCs were "living" their lives whether the player was there or not.
@persies4397 I feel like even the sorta janky ai adds to the fun, it's still way better than the static characters they have in starfield
That was poetry
I am still astounded at how badly they dropped the Fallout show hype ball with not having a bunch of new Fallout content ready to go. Instead they just break FO4 and bail. What the fuck are they thinking.
Easy, they were pushing people to play F76 aka their ATM that prints money via the atomic shop.
At this point they should just do a full fallout 3 remake, just fully remake the game, shot by shot. Halo 2 style, I'd pay full price
Matty deleting posts again. Unsubbed
@@eldonb5131?
My thoughts exactly.
Huh. That's a really funny takeaway about FO3. My problem with the ending was that you can literally have a Ghoul or Super Mutant companion with the ability to put in the code and they just won't do it, so the only option is to sacrifice a life when it's completely unnecessary. It's the peak of "we as writers decided the story ends this way".
It is peak bad writing from Bethesda. FO3's story was already contrived and lame in so many ways after the opening but the original ending was the worst part. There is *no* reason Fawkes shouldn't take the radiation instead of you, and the fact that with the Broken Steel version of the ending they basically call you a coward for letting him go instead of you... it's something else.
Emil needs to lose his job, and I don’t say that lightly. Dudes been a complete disaster since he started there and actively spits in the face of lore repeatedly… he’ll he even says he won’t be beholden to what came before…. Dudes an egomaniac
He's a joke and a nepotism hire.
I think we just need multiple writers.
@@TheParagonIsDeadAn actual writer's room would be a godsend. The everyone go off and do your own thing approach is just not working.
He has Diddy/Epstein level dirt on Todd Howards
I can't dislike Emil because he's always come across as a pretty nice guy. I even think he has some great ideas (Unity in Starfield being a great NG+ tool) But I do think something needs to be done as he's been coasting off of one great questline in Oblivion for nearly 20 years now.
_Starfield_ feels like a dead amusement park. You walk up to an attraction, push the button, and animatronic Abraham Lincon tells you about the Civil War between the Freestar Collective and United Colonies.
And an hour later he's still there, waiting for you to push the button.
The world isn't alive. Nothing changes, not really. Nothing feels like it matters. Nobody makes decisions. Why am I deciding _for the UC Council_ what to do about heatleeches? Why am I the single most important person in the universe and nobody else exists or acts on their own?
Because it’s a game and you’re the protagonist.
There’s a mission in Shattered Space where you help a family recover armor and relics. Players on Reddit are flipping shit because they don’t get the armor, the NPC does. So if your not the single most important person, people still shit on it
Because it's a game & you're.... oh, I see someone already pointed it out.
If you pay attention to the writing (which presumably people must have done to be able to form the opinion that it's soooo terrible.... 😂) you would have learned the narrative justification why an outsider was asked to shoulder such responsibility.
Sometimes it's like people just want to complain....
No, I understand what you're saying and the replies points of view. The world doesn't feel alive. Most NPC don't even have a routine in Starfield. An example is the staff of MAST they don't leave the building at all. I have practically saved the settled systems, but Admiral Logan, who was their during the terrormoph crisis, somehow forgets who I am during Sarah's quest back to the planet she crashes on is immersion breaking. Why would you need to ask who we are?
A protagonist isn't the centre of the universe. Why are stores open all of the time w/o the vendors ever leaving? Why can I sleep for seven years and the whole galaxy just stays on hold, waiting for me? Nothing happens if I don't do it and nothing affects anything else. Why would the UC-Vanguard want an FC-Ranger on their team or vice-versa? Why do my relationships have no impact on one another? Why do I need to be introduced as a stranger to people who also know me as a hero? Why can I start an important, vital, quest, then disappear for a year doing other things and everyone is just waiting for me. Time out the quest, give me stakes, make things matter.
The world is dead. It could have been so much more.
@@chrisharding9531 Every store is always open and I can sleep for seven years or something like that, and nobody notices.
How the fuck can you still have faith in ES6 after everything they’ve done the last 6 years? Insanity
More like the last 13...
Unfathomable coping
I mean they already went ahead and warned everyone about having to high expectations about elder scrolls 6 so you know that bethesda is not willing to change anything!
Because the world and lore are established. DEi, ESG, people scared about HR or about sjw co-workers will have a shield. Where as with starfield they didn't
@Panssel is it any game? No it's fallout. It sucked, people like you are why bethesda is still slipping.
Emil is a huge part of the problem at BGS, to be honest it seems like leadership in general needs a shake up there, considering he couldn't have stayed in his position for so long without the backing of other management.
Precisely.
Emil is the most blatant and obvious example of problems at Bethesda, but the scary part is: no one in their right mind would allow him to stay where he is unless they themselves are incompetent or not thinking clearly. That Emil has his job is a sign that people above him aren't great at their jobs either. Apparently Emil and Todd were friends before Bethesda, and if that's true, yeah, there's a clear bias in play here that's killing the company.
Agreed, this guy is a potato that lives in his pseudo reality bubble. He needs to be mashed.
Microsoft should merge Bethesda and Obsidian, and put Obsidian in control.
@@Longknifeeven then with Todd being friends with Emil I don’t think it should justify him staying. Michael kirkbride also I believe is old friends with Todd and yet he I believe left the company recently due to creative issues.
I used to have sympathy for Emil, I didn’t think he was the worst (definitely not the best) and I enjoyed some of his stories but he clearly isn’t working with Bethesda. I don’t understand how a company which now has clear objective issues won’t be willing to change for their own profit. The engine needs to change, the game mechanics need to change and the writing needs to change.
@@williamfrank962 Michael Kirkbride left the company ages ago, but still did consulting work here and there since he wrote a huge percent of the lore.
What DID happen is Kurt Kuhlmann was "encouraged" to leave the company, which was odd, given they previously described him as their resident Elder Scrolls lore expert. We also only know he was "encouraged" to leave because Michael Kirkbride said as much, implying that he thought it was a mistake to drive him off.
Emil: People just don't like sci-fi!
Mass effect: Am I a joke to you?
At this point Emil could just say what he truly thinks: "We made an amazing game and you'll haters can suck me off day after day". He has an enormous ego that is taking down Bethesda for years.
Dead Space: Am I a joke to you?
No creators these days ever want to just sit back and ask themselves, "Did I just make a bad product?" Nah, it has to be the fans fault, every single time. That, or just call them racist and move on.
@nickh4354 no, the fact that good games still exist means you're being very hyperbolic.
Emil needs to go and they need to bring back Michael Kirkbride.
Emil’s comment on F3’s ending is very telling. Players didn’t have a problem with dying. The problem was that Fawkes was totally able to go into the chamber for you but just says “naw, sorry. To lazy to develop that ending”. Only for you to somehow survive a fatal radiation dose in Broken Steel. Bro.
They're learning all the wrong lessons. Also as long as Emil is in a leadership role in the team I don't have any hope for any of their future projects, sadly.
@@w_stlerymes I honestly feel the same is true for Todd Howard too. He 100% knows that the games he promotes and directs are not what they used to be and frankly some would say are in unacceptable condition at release. He’s also a champion for Emil. Emil has no place in the role he is in, Todd seems to be a complicit liar 🤥 and as result seems two faced. I understand the entire industry is failing to understand what the community wants or at the very least to release games at the same quality of the past, but Bethesda has been declining NOTICEABLY for over 10 years, if not longer. I’m not one to revel in the misfortune of others, but in someways the situation Ubisoft has gotten itself into gives me hope that if they can be forced to reckon with consequences of poor design choices and leadership decisions, maybe one day Bethesda will have to change for the better too.
@@dannygleason5912 I frankly do not want to see these companies change for the better. I want them to end up not existing because the people in them who make the games what they are need that black mark on their record. "Oh, mister Emil Pathetic... hmmm... says here you wrote the story of BethesdaOut 4... wait, that company went bankrupt after every subsequent game went belly-up and became a stink-bomb in the press. Do you have an explanation for that?"
Emil cannot come up with an explanation for the fates of BethesdaOut 76 or Starfield that does not make him look unsuited for writing jobs. I doubt he even understands that the industry is aware of his paper airplanes quote and it does not endear him to said industry. I know I would never hire anyone who said that to participate in making an RPG.
@@dannygleason5912 Fallout 76 was that point where Bethesda stopped feeling like Bethesda, for me anyhow. ESO was a different studio, and Fallout 76 really should have been as well. I notice a lot of "live service" design decisions baked into Starfield where they don't make any sense, like outposts and storage limitations, or the clutter on the ship adding to the cargo weight for example. Maybe there devs working on 76 forgot how to design a single player experience, or maybe they had considered at one point having a Starfield 1st subscription with Starfield being a live service multiplayer game, but abandoned that idea early on, leaving in place a lot of weird MMO-like design choices that modders are forced to fix.
@@dannygleason5912 Outside of 76, starfield is fine. Its a different IP with a different approach. Its the audience that has changed. People dont like Bethesda style games anymore. Nothing short of them switching to a completely different play loop is going to satisfy people now.
@@FMBriggs Fallout 76, according to anonymous sources that have been correct about much information given, was a business move. A proposition, a necessary evil to get what they needed to support the single player games.
It feels like Bethesda has been trying to automate the process of creating "Bethesda magic" for as little effort and money as possible. And _this_ is the sum of all that effort, what a waste.
The only thing innovative about Starfield was their procedural generation. But it feels proceduraly generated. There are plenty of good games that generate maps that are good but Bethesda's latest efforts gutted the core features that make that magic as the price. After landing on 10 planets you realize that the uniqueness of the planets was just a facade as you enter the same raider outpost for the 3+ time. There are more issues like bugs or the story and quest treating you like you have an IQ of 60 but if that exploration "Bethesda magic" was there, I would have spent more time with this game.
@@Nickolia481Thats an observer issue. If people thought there was going handcrafted or stimulating content when just landing at a random point on a planet or moon, it shows that understanding is in short supply. Its fine for people to not know, as ignorance is the curse of life, but people speak and act as if they know exactly what is what. Games are smoke and mirrors and the goal is to sell the illusion of the games world.
@@sagearmaggedon7307 Seeing the same dungeon 3+ times on different planets shatters the illusion. Having handcrafted content on a planet in a galaxy with 1000 star systems might be unreasonable, but at least having the coding in place to simply set a dungeon aside after it’s used so it doesn’t pop back up again right away shouldn’t be that hard (simply put it in a list of “already used dungeons” that doesn’t get used again until the “dungeons not used” list has been exhausted). Also, if there’s too many planets to have handcrafted locations on every planet, maybe there’s too many planets. Outer Worlds had just one star system and a handful of planets, but every planet was handcrafted and felt more real for it. At the very least, Starfield’s core worlds should have been handcrafted. Exploring Jemison and having everything on it be randomized (including a settlement with one colonist talking about how good it was to be light years away from civilization- on Jemison) was ridiculous.
@@EyeOfMagnus4E201 It also shatters the illusion in cyberpunk, when I walk up to a door and cant go inside or when I talk to shadowheart at camp, she teleports from a meditative stance to magically standing up. Games have limitations, which is why illusions are needed in the first place. To help with the same locations issue, I have an idea. Maybe not land at random landing zones if you are not there for resources or to build stuff?….maybe…
@@sagearmaggedon7307 Perhaps, but if you’re trying to role-play as an explorer, with your survey, botany, and zoology skills maxed out like I was, it’s not a rewarding experience to find out that plants, creatures, and locations all look alike after a while. Of course, I guess I could just stop exploring, which I did, and I haven’t played the game for 11 months now, though I’m planning on going back just to see what the vehicle and Shattered Space are like myself, (if I can pull away from Skyrim and Stellaris).
It's disturbing that Emil and some other devs are pretending nothing's wrong when there clearly is. The reviews are bad, the sales are beneath what we'd expect from this studio, but you're happy with the response? What is happening in that studio???
They're going the Ubisoft/Bioware toxic positivity route.
Sales are bad ? It was one of the top selling games last year.
They could also be afraid of retaliation from higher ups
@@Ball.Daily11Yes, but only for a moment. Back in November last year, Bethesda boasted about the total player count at 13.9m, which was pretty good. Then, around April(or March) this year, Bethesda boasted about the total player count again, but it was still around 13.9m. That can only mean right after the initial release, total unit sales just drop off the cliff and even game pass didn't even help boost it further.
The OGs who made Bethesda one of the best in the business are no longer working there and now the studio is a shadow of it's former self. If they were still around, I would have more confidence that TES6 would be a masterpiece worth looking forward to but instead, I'm worried about it.
Some of the worst writers, worst animators, and least creative developers in the rpg space. They basically depend on creation engine to basically “forge mode” games
They still using that outdated engine with clayface animation,janky controls and still has long loading screen
Can't really be called RPGs anymore, not since skyrim. Fallout 4 with its yes, yes or sarcastic (yes) dialogue options killed all role play elements
@@alex1212456 Not necessarily, the aspects of the game are relative. If Bethesda created a more linear structured game, they would surpass other rpgs by a landslide in those departments you mention. Measure the aspects of a game in respect to the total game. For a game this large, the things you mentioned are “good”.
It's not just the writing. It's the delivery of the dialog. The scene is never acted out but instead It's always delivered in the same mono tone voice.
I mean compare the delivery of the dialog between a Bethesda game and Witcher 3
@@alexoelkers2292 I mean, compare the open ended gameplay of a Bethesda game to the witcher 3…..Everything comes at a cost.
0:39 Brother, there are plenty of people who don't play Bethesda games, but criticize them heavily. They are Bethesda's former fans that no longer feel like spending $70 to learn that Bethesda is still declining.
Superbly put man .
They have been declining since Skyrim. They don’t care. It’s so sad
Really is sad how many formerly awesome game franchises, pillars of the industry, are either in ruins or completely dead. From my own gaming history.. Battlefield is on the ropes, Halo is on the ropes, TES and Fallout are on life support from modders, Far Cry is just re-skinned since 2012. I'm sure there are more but I can only handle so much depression lol.
Emil is lost in the sauce, they need new writers
They've needed to replace Emil for ages lmao
The best missions were the ones like when you join the strikers gang, The mantis lair or Vanguard storyline. The problem with Starfield is most of the game could be fixed with a cell phone! If they created actual missions that made sense people would love it.
and new animators, coders and an engine that doesn't require quite so many loading screens :)
They had writers but fired them in 2006
It's not just the writing, as in what the text says, but the whole writing design (I don't know the technical term for it). I remember a mission that really annoyed me, that Legrange guy in Neon. I told him over and over and over again in no uncertain terms I wanted nothing to do with him and he was like: come ooon, you'll change your mind and the game just put that mission in my quest log. I don't want to do it and I don't know why there isn't a clear way to reject some missions. They did this before in Fallout 4, where the only options were yes, very yes, sarcastic yes, and OMG! yes... This is really got on my nerves and it ruins the experience in role playing. I can't have a law abiding model citizen character, because the game now gets my character involved in drug dealing.
Emil is just beyond delusional. The toxic positivity this dude reeks of is obnoxious. "Best game we ever made" my ass. Usually I'm pretty civil and chill, but man I just can't stand this slap in the face. Emil is just shoving shit in our faces and telling us it smells good at this point.
Great username
Emil is an incompetent buffoon. So far up his own ass
It’s PR talk, it’s always been lies to make things sound good
Yeah, their [best game made] is decided by the players not by Bethesda.
Which is I have a very bad feeling about the main story of TES6 if he's the one writing it.
HOW IS EMIL NOT FIRED YET ?
How is Bethesda not shutdown yet?
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xhtheir last mainline game made a billion in 3 days.
TESVI will probably also see those types of numbers simply based on hype.
He's Todd's close personal friend.
@@scirrhia_kruden That's true. After Todd retires Emil likely will go as well.
I swear he must have dirt on Todd or something
PC Gamer had a funny article title: “Bethesda honcho says Starfield is 'the best game we've ever made' in massive bout of amnesia.” 😂
That sounds like a headline from the Hard-Drive lmao
@@vilek_7235 I think we've reached a point where even notoriously access-driven game journalists are just kinda done with Bethesda's bullshit, lol. Like, we've reached the point where even they're like, "What's that, Bethesda? You might blacklist us if we say mean things about you? You might not send us review copies of your future shitty-ass games? Oh... oh no... whatever shall we do if we're forced to play and review other, better games instead?"
Excuse me what? If 5 duds can make Valheim, if a small indie studio can make Enshrouded, if Mods can make a DLC like Follout London, and a AAA studio owned by 3 trillion USD company says Starfield is the best game they ever done? You're going Ubi route, good work.
This needs a pin, Well said.
You're totally right about that. But bethesda did manage to manipulate players to defend their game, while Ubi, doesn't...
Valheim development is glscislly slow to the point it feels like a scam
@@DarkAbilexbro, valheim added like one new zone that was already partially completed like 2+ years after it's initial EA release.
@dn9156 It started with 2 people and they've actually released a hell of a lot since it's been out for as many people as it is. I played it from say one theres easily 2x the content there was at launch probably 3x honestly
I wish I loved Starfield more. But there was just to much random generation for me to really connect with it. Skyrim's setting was a character itself. Being able to wander around but also be grounded in the world with familiar landmarks dotting the horizon. In Starfield if I go to a random planet I just know its all random stuff. Really bursts the bubble of the fantasy. Also the irony is that the world in Starfield feels smaller because of it.
This.
The random generation thing really killed the game in every sort of way possible. Hand crafted locations is Bethesda's bread and butter; and they should've stuck to that
it got no soul
Yeah, worlds make no sense, like a road between buildings or outposts. Find a trail, leads to a waterfall or anything. Starfield “We don’t do that, we just have empty” complete success 😅 or just spend the game in the menu fast travelling across the universe which has zero adventure.
Starfield needs more handcrafted planets
You're right... it does feel smaller than Skyrim, which sounds completely impossible given the differences in physical scale. But it really does.
yes, players DO WANT TO LIVE in those worlds.., BUT it has to have quality, not just quantity..
I don't think Matty means that we don't want to be immersed and feel like we are part of the world. He's referring to the idea of being able to do every piece of content on one character as well as never ending procedural generation making sure you never need to make a new character.
What really makes a game feel like it's possible to live in is that finality, in addition to having various gameplay styles and story beats that are limited based on your choices. The idea is that you can replay the game as a good or evil or somewhere inbetween character "this time i'll make this decision in that quest rather than that" and that having an effect. And the varying playstyles being different enough to warrant multiple playthroughs.
I think it's a bit of both. I want to have a game so large that when I replay it I see things I missed the first time. But I also want to have the ability to affect the things I did the first time in different ways in the form of choice and consequence. If I had a simple and short game with 10 major choice and consequences and nothing else, I would feel cheated. With Skyrim I can have the hundreds of dungeons and locations, as well as a variety of outcomes for major quests that I will almost certainly take on each character playthrough. The endless content is most important with loot. I never want to feel like I have the best sword or armor, because then there is literally no incentive to keep going.
We want to relate to the world
Some people may want to forever live in the game world... me? I just want to see everything then roll credits after.... After 5 years pass maybe I'll return and make a few different decisions.
It's funny that the lesson they took from Fallout 3 was "players don't want the game to ever end", and they quickly DLCed the death ending out, when a year later Obsidian did the exact same "final ending" thing in New Vegas. Then they DIDN'T undo it with DLCs. And for all the faults New Vegas had on release, the ending was one thing I never saw complaints about.
Bethesda never seems to take into account WHY things get criticized. "This element failed, so the entire idea of that element was bad" seems to be as far as their understanding ever goes. They never appear to consider that maybe their implementation of it was bad.
Shattered space, more like wasted space on my hard drive.
😂bruh, that's outrageous 😂
Its just 8gb in size , stop lying , you didn't even bought it
Spot on. BGS no longer gets the benefit of doubt from me.
All Bethesda games are a waste of space.
@@RTXWorld-m2hhe'll have to redownload the game
100% this is cut content that they polished up to sell it as DLC. I cannot honestly believe they looked at this, and then they looked at Phantom Liberty and said "Yeah, our DLC is definitely worth 30$".
I have 2800 hrs on Skyrim and usually increase by a few dozen hours a month
8 hrs on Starfield and stuck there
* Skyrim SE
Speaks volumes, I'm probably at 1600 hrs across all versions of Skyrim (PS3 and PC) and based on the reviews I've seen have yet to touch Starfield. I'll probably end up getting the "directors cut" at a deep discount someday though.
Ive played fallout 4 for 1657 hours, about 1200+ hours of that was modded content.
I never need to play another bethesda game ever again knowing how copy + paste they can be.
I'm just bummed out that Bethesda has no intention to innovate or change in any capacity. They kind of seem to have the Ubisoft toxic positivity issue where any criticism is being shut down. It's frustrating. They are going to be their own end if they don't innovate. People want new and interesting gameplay, stories, etc.
I was saying the same thing comparing them to ubisoft. They think they can't do any wrong. These companies need to be humbled. Maybe they'll return to the glory days
@@TitusKingdom they have lost their drive to write good compelling stories and have gameplay that fits the narrative, all they want to do is cobble together the same old tired mechanics, the same boring stories, even more boring dungeons. It just sucks man. I want to like Bethesda but they make it impossible. I feel about them the way I feel about Ubisoft. If they don't make an effort to change and grow then they deserve whatever fate their studio faces.
How can Bethesda be so ignorant. They are just flat out ignoring their consumers and think they can’t do anything wrong, how does the worst performing and worst reviewed game they have, make them think it’s the “best game they’ve ever made”
But... but... but... they gave us a car when we asked, right? 🙄 sigh...
@@drtaverner That's the thing: we've been asking since Fallout 3.
Emil Pagliarulo, Todd Howard and Nepotism. Name a better combination.
Because causals keep buying whatever they put out thanks to excellent marketing and games that are good enough for a causal audience
toxic positivism, its on all companies now and the official communities
My theory: Bethesda is hampered by the egos of the few at the top, who probably had very little to do with the bulk of the writing in pre fallout 4 bethesda. The actual writers have left, and they can't deliver what they used to.
Starfield has such a limited imagination. It feels so limited and dull.
tbf a LOT of studios can change like 60% of staff between projects. They're not some cohesive whole for 20 years...
@@KeithElliott-zd8cx Yeah that's where the egos at the top come in. They seem to have never hired anyone who can write better than themselves since the early days. Just a theory. Because as you say, this hasn't happened to every company.
Bethesda is a unique enigma to me. How did they get so bad?
The problem is that BGS think they are still on the top in terms of quality and games. That's not the case anymore. It was 10 years back. It might be a bit harsh but I think Bethesda is now a strong AA studio.
More like 14-15 years back. Fallout 4 was good but not that good.
Its literally the same stuff. I heard someone mention the industry has surpassed Bethesda. Me: how exactly? When Bethesda launched an rpg, there was always another RPG that did do many things better than them. Mass effect 1 to oblivion is what witcher 3 is to fallout 4. Mass effect 2 is to skyrim what BG3 is to starfield. Remember Dragon Age origins vs fallout 3? Remember Dark Souls, Dragons dogma?
Alot of games did so many things at a higher level than Bethesda. So what changed? The audience. Consumers are devolving further each year, and companies adapting practices to make up for these deficiencies has been labled and call advancement or “Its 2024 get with the times.” People are in a perception trap and dont even realize it.
They are simply delusional now. Todd himself in Matty interview raves how his tech team is ''moving along'' with improvements to creation engine and how they are doing a ''great job''. And it echos what BGS always say, they really believe their tech is adequate. Dude, while your engine is moving along, the rest of the industry flashes forward, they ran away and left you in the dust so back its sad, moving along is not good enough, you are so behind industry standards its insane. Their devs calling Starfield technical marvel is simply laughable statement. Its a technical sadness, patched together on loading screens, doesn't even work on HDD, dude, you are so up your asses it is sad.
Yeah, your graphics, combat and writing always sucked balls. But it was cool you had dynamic worlds where NPCs trully lived and were greatly simulated, you could loot everything from them, no crappy random drops, you can take everything from the corpse apart their underwear. Leveling system was good. 15 years ago it was good enough to stand out, now look where the industry is, you are still making 2010 games when industry making 2024 games.
To be blunt, they were never on top in terms of quality. Their UI has always been bad, leveling systems usually poorly done, games were usually bug-ridden, and so on. They were just kind of alone in creating a wide world with lots of content, lots of little details. And these things led to a lot of passionate gamers, including some who dove into modding to add still more.
But Bethesda never learned from their mistakes. They just made more of the same, except maybe dumbing something down, and using those saving to try and add some new monetization scheme instead.
@@Axterix13 They always had one of the largest power levels on the battlefield though. Even if they dont have clean strikes, power is power….
Dude just because a game gets a lot of bad reviews it doesn't mean it's a "review bomb". That implies it isn't true. That's just a catch phrase to pretend the bad reviews are fake. This DLC was obviously done before the game came out so not much has changed but the price tag certainly doesn't help for something this low quality.
He meant it that way. He said that many people went to review bomb the DLC right when it was launched. And that is true. Starfield has incredibly high amount of passionate haters.
Yes, the DLC is low quality and the main game is mid. But there *are* fake negative reviews.
The bar was low, shattered space took it even lower.
I dont care if making games is hard. My job is hard, does anyone care? No, if you make a shit game you deserve criticism.
No kidding, someone can spend 40 hours building a car, but if that car sucks and barely runs, the car is crap. Doesn't matter how much heart you put into it.
Edit: 40 hours is probably not a great time frame into a car, more like 40 months lol.
Agreed. At the end of the day they’re selling a product, and not to mention, promising things.
"I don't like your work ≠ "you did a bad job"
So, "deserve" is kinda heavy handed imo
His work is not bad because a person dislikes it, most people dislike it because the work is bad. His work IS bad and Emil can not write nor take criticism. @ReaperCet
Yes! Testify!
Seeing the sad state of starfeild and now its failed redemption. I think its safe to say Bethesda needs to clean out their creative leads, because they clearly dont have what they used to, and its becoming more and more of a detriment.
No they just need to be shutdown at this point.
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xhForced to sell their pre Microsoft buy out IPs at least.
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xh I think shutting them down is a little too far lol. I’m no Bethesda fan, not really a fan of any of their games, but this does look like an issue of not wanting to change. They seem slow in advancing / evolving their design philosophies. I believe that there are talented developers working there but they fall victim to mismanagement & poor leadership. Starfield felt like they had too many ideas but didn’t dig deep enough into any of them.
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xhLook, you're evidently a child, but things aren't that simply. There's need to be changes but there's nuance here that has to be taken into account.
Everything I've heard about Pagliarulo is that he's an incompetent who's managed to fail his way upwards into a lead role that's been observably detrimental to the games over time. He's basically lead writer _and_ designer on most Bethesda titles now and I can't speak to the design side of things, but taking a deep dive into the guy's writing is wild. He has ideas that sound cool on paper, at least sometimes, but then has absolutely no idea how to tie cause and effect together in a way that gels with reality or believable character motivations.
The timeline definitely fits, too. He had a small role in Morrowind's DLC, was more involved in Oblivion, and became lead writer for Fallout 3 and Skyrim. Now, I like all of those games, but if nothing else the finer points of the writing got observably _dumber_ along that particular stretch and haven't improved since -- with the exception of New Vegas, which of course wasn't made by Bethesda. And that seems to remain a real sore point for them with regards to how they handle their IP now.
Elderscrolls 6 is cooked. It's not the graphics that kills this game, it's not the bugs, its the completely cringe awful writing and supremely uninspired ideas that cause starfield to have absolutely no soul.
To be fair, they learned how to maximize their return of investment. Cut all content out and let them pay for small chunks. Make the chunks as small as possible and as expensive as possible. As todd said people buy everything 😢. They learned how to make procedural content and sell it.
I am baffled as to how Emil Pagliarulo still has a job. His best work is well behind him, his current work a parody of his past glories. I'm calling it. ESVI is going to be a soul crushing disappointment.
I am praying to every higher power that you are wrong and that Bethesda locks in and delivers a masterpiece after all these years. The waiting can’t be for nothing man…😭
I think the real talent from the past is gone. Emil / Todd won the politcal battles/power struggles and pushed them out.
Tbh, with how the climate within the gaming space is these days I don't see a sceneraio where any studio could make a sequel to Skyrim that won't be met with a lot of criticism. People's expectations are so huge and so clearly defined that if the final product deviates just a little from that, and we all know it will, people are going to be dissapointed. The broader audience and those are the ones who will be the loudest don't even want an ES6. What they really want is Skyrim 2 and they won't get that.
Past glories? Fetch quest and extremely short guild quests. Oblivion did it right. The guild’s missions in that game were great. In Skyrim they were awful. The Thieves Guild was okay but everything else was as crap.
@@Tinywarsyou are right. Skybabies don’t remember the quality of oblivion and Morrowind
Went to a moon with a cave. It literally had nothing in it. Starfield in a nutshell
@@afungusamungus2860 haha you’re not wrong. The worst part is it was a moon on the system map that had a marker shown for a cave. Not just a randomly generated one. I literally spent 15 minutes wandering the same little bit over and over again to see if I missed anything. Nope. Just a dead man on a cave in with 300ish credits. I was pissed lol
That’s the issue with it. So much is empty.
The quests should’ve been just on a handful of handcrafted planets and then all the others planets should be POI on a reduced scale. Also the other planets should just be for outposts and research. This would’ve been great as it would have given us a concentrated place to “live “ like Skyrim and fallout but you can venture out to the depths of space for some purpose if you want.
@@gary1488 I was really hoping the modding scene would help but the game is just so boring nobody cares to make it better. I did like the faction quests and main quest but all the side side content is pathetic. Especially in comparison to Skyrim or oblivion or morrowind. Morrowind had same-y style tombs and caves etc but they had much better stuff to find and enemies to encounter. Starfield has almost nothing
@@gary1488 I can’t disagree. I think they were expecting the same level of modding that Skyrim has and that’s not going to be the case. I really wanted to love it but a single play through for my love of BGS is enough. I’m stoked for the wayward realms!
Bethesda went from one of the best companies to a shell of itself. Sad
Bethesda was never one of the best companies, stop the cap.
I went from insomniac (spyro/ratchet and clank) to Bethesda (fallout and ES) to larian (BG3).
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xh it probably is not one of the best, it was one of the most beloved
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xh Yes they were. For a while, they were the best at open world rpg games. Nobody came close. Even now, years later, no open world rpg has been as successful as Skyrim or been able to replicate it's formula.
Their recent "failures" won't change that fact.
That said. They need new blood and alot of revaluation if they wanna compete in the modern gaming world.
Starfield had the potential to be a great game, but lacks alot of features and is ultimately too shallow. It's still redeemable, but they are gonna need to give us alot of big updates with new features and mechanics.
@@deandoesstuff3371skyrim sucks lol... Tons of open world games are MUCH MUCH better. Skyrim is unplayable after playing masterpieces like witcher 3.. Cyberpunk 2077.. Ghost of tsusima. Skyrim is slop for normies
Emil's interview is a *really* bad look, and it pretty much confirms that Bethesda are in an echo chamber and completely out of touch.
Sure social media is cancer, but it seems a lot of peoples reaction to that is to circle the wagons and delude themselves with positivity.
its amazing how so many people treat social media as the ONLY FORM of communication? We had forums back in the day, it was so much more meaningless to troll and talk shit to devs when you had to go into their own forums where they could ban you.
Emil actually thinks Starfield is the best game they ever made. WOW. Yeah in that cast Tes6 is really dead. They've confirmed it
Emil has been sucking his own ego dry for over a decade. The man is immune to criticism and will proclaim his works as career highlights while the public at large thinks they are the worst part of the game. I knew the moment Emil had not been fired from Bethesda when the Starfield announcement hit the writing was going to be bad. The fact he has still managed to stay is borderline nepotism.
Man just cannot write a decent story
@@unlimitedgamerworks6125
Despite him being on the team I was willing to give Starfield a chance. Surely he finally learned to listen to comments from Fallout 4, but surely ther overall comments about 76? I have like 250+ hours in Starfield. And the worst thing I can say is I wish I could refund the time I put into it.
The Neil Druckman of Bethesda.
@@KeytarArgonianNeil Druckmann is a great developer lmao just because you don’t like 1 divisive sequel he made doesn’t take away from the fact that everything he has worked on has been a 9+/10
@@calwu8252 Neil Druckman didn’t even come up with the concept of the last of us. He came on to development of TLoU later than everyone else than gave himself the full credit in the shows credits. Absolute hack. There’s a reason the 2nd game was divisive.
Emil needs to go...
Bethesda needs to go.
@@TheGreatOne-gw7xh Zenimax needs to go
Obsidian needs to come
@@vytis47obsidian is also garbage.
@@vytis47i will if they do
The main problem for me is the exploration. I've played every BGS game since Morrowind, and they always had a knack for crafting environments I enjoyed walking around in, looking at things, and discovering stuff like caves or structures or landmarks. I felt immersed. With Starfield, the environments are bland because they're procedurally generated with landmarks procedurally plopped down kind of uniformly all over the place rather than handcrafted with attention to detail. Before the game released, my idea of what the game would be was kind of like Mass Effect where you have the main planets you visit with smaller, handcrafted maps and then the procedural generation parts would be where you go if you want to farm loot or mine resources and build outposts. From the way things were described it sounded like there was a separation between the handcrafted stuff and procedural stuff. Like, Mass Effect you had the main planets and then you had the more bland maps where you drive around with the Mako. The procedural stuff would be like the Mako maps where it's a separate thing from the main game. At the same time, it annoys me that there aren't any planets or moons that are just empty. EVERY planet and moon, even the most barren and "lifeless" ones, have random outposts scattered around and ships landing and encounters with npcs and enemies. It feels like everything's already been explored by someone. There's never a planet or moon where I feel like I'm the first person to take a step on it. Whole galaxy's already discovered and settled to the last inch apparently. It's like you said in the last video. The "discovery" isn't there.
Yup, thats my main problem with Starfield...As much as I wanna like it it's just okay to me. The exploration is the biggest and most important miss of the game. I dont like wandering at all in Starfield when you just continue to see the same locations recycled over and over. The gameplay loop also gets tedious. "Fast travel here, fast travel there" It constantly takes the immersion out of the game. The scope of the game was simply just too big and they bit off more than they can chew. Its ironic though, Starfield is supposed to be their "biggest game" but it feels like their smallest compared to the predecessors. Starfield is a mile wide and an inch deep is the best way I can explain it. It's not bad, but its dissapointing when you know what could have been if they stuck to what made them great.
I got the same problem with No Man's Sky too. I got bored of that too after like 50hrs. Same planets too, very minor variance of materials to gain , but all are populated and littered with outposts and aliens doing stuff.
I think Shattered Space shows why you shouldn't sell a DLC before the base game even ships. Both Erdtree and Phantom Liberty took two years to get out the door. And I have to imagine a lot of that time was spent conceptualizing and listen to feedback about the base games. With Starfield it seems like BGS faced some truly unsolvable problems, and the DLC was less a passion and more an obligation they already sold to people. The biggest smoking gun for me has got to be that price tag. I think anyone that takes pride in their work would either spend more time to put out a longer expansion, or cut the price at least a little.
Problem is, they can't really cut the price much, because they pre-sold the expansion with the base game.
Really, they needed to put effort into the expansion, not just to redeem Starfield, but to keep hype up or at least somewhat restore it for ES6. Like it needed to do things like have meaningful choices, revamp melee combat, add a ton of new PoI variants or a new system that can actually generate random building/cave interiors for them. And a bunch of that stuff, while it could launch with the DLC, should be just a patch for the main game.
But, well, the patches they released for Starfield made it pretty clear they were not going to put any real effort into addressing the game's issues. "here, have a vehicle so you can not bother exploring, because it is still pointless".
There is a trend in Triple A Gaming where you have these studios heads, leaders, executive overindulge in this unjustified optimism with a head in the sand mentality. Not saying all internet criticism is constructive or authentic but to ignore a bad reception as big as this, and continue on this trodden path is so freaking frustrating. They don't want to change, they are very content with how the conduct their business and make their games.
I gotta feel sad for Matty, seeing a studio he loves falling to pieces. It's what I went through with Bioware. I was into Bioware from BG1, and even gave them a pass on Andromeda. But it was clearly their direction. We'll see how the next ME goes. The new DA looks, rough....feels like they just amplified DA:I, which I couldn't get into.
I honestly don't see how the two are comparable tbh. Bethesda had one arguably bad game.
Homie, it’s just video games, it’s not that serious lol
I feel this, loved the old bg games back in the day and haven't enjoyed their releases lately. I had to force myself to finish inquisition after starting it three different times.
@@justme87999 fallout 76; you forgot about that one?
@@justme87999 It's all subjective, but remember, to a lot of people Fallout 4 was a letdown, with its 4 choice dialogue. Take that off the chart though, and you have FO76 and Starfield. While Starfield wasn't nearly as rough, it wasn't the comeback that BGS needed after FO76.
Likewise, Bioware only had one 'bad' game, but, just like with Bethesda, it was back to back with another let-down title.
the rest of us have been saying this since fallout 76 came out
This really reeks of the "toxic positivity" problem being talked about in modern game dev studios... They're so out of touch with what people actually want from their games.
Bethesda needs to shake up some leadership positions. It doesn't seem like anybody in power there has enough vision to SEE that their design is stale- let alone to steer it in a better direction.
Not to mention, putting The Elder Scrolls on the backburner for 13+ years was an unbelievably poor decision. BGS knew that even if they only focused on TES and Fallout, there was guaranteed to be a nearly 10 year gap between new releases for each respective franchise. Faced with that sobering reality, leadership at BGS decided to add ANOTHER major IP to their juggling routine and spent a few years making a mediocre multiplayer game. Bruh.
The fact Todd and BGS actively watch your channel means that these critiques might actually get us somewhere
I kept Starfield on my Series X since launch since I knew an expansion was coming. Following me beating Shattered Space in the short amount of time it is, I promptly uninstalled the game. If they were looking for their Far Harbor moment, they failed. It did the opposite for me, I decided to more than likely be done with Starfield for good.
Far Harbor by itself is way better than ALL of Starfield. Starfield is the most soulless, bland game I’ve ever played. I hate saying that.
@@GangstarComputerGod I played the main story as well as all the major faction stories, but I had no interest in doing any exploration from planet to planet. They were all too similar, bland, and those constant loading screens slowed the process. I initially walked away thinking the game was ‘fine’, and now a year later this DLC has done nothing to improve my view of the game
@@landoncopenhaver I’m not sure how many hours I put in because I actually uninstalled it, but it wasn’t a small amount. I just know that at one point I realized I was so bored I didn’t even care what happened. I had no desire to get another spinny thing, I knew there was nothing new on any planet, and the cities were small and had no interesting people or quests. I was so bummed. I’m fairly certain this DLC was cut from the game because that faction always seemed like a huge hole in the “universe” of the game. Their willingness to make their games worse to keep selling pieces off in a slow drip is going to sink BGS.
I might be done with all of Bethesda at this point. I don’t think I’m even gonna give their newer games a chance when they come out, unless there are just overwhelmingly positive reviews. I think I’m no longer a fan. Kind of disappointed to say that.
This is not new, Emil has said some off the wall statements in the past. I’m not at all shocked to hear what he has said about Starfield.
That snippet from Emil at 7:49 is just stunning. BGS is so high on their own supply it's ridiculous. Skyrim did so well that they've been in this "who cares how good the game actually is, they'll buy whatever we release. modders will fix it anyway" mentality ever since. BGS might be one of if not *the* worst dev studio in the industry, today. They're shockingly out of touch and delusional and behind the curve. There is absolutely no way ES6 will be any good. It will just be more slop that releases a generation or two too late.
Yeah, bgs went wrong when they started thinking they can focus on “passion projects” like starfield instead of making the games the fans want. To be fair I think it’s an entertainment industry as a whole problem. Movies, shows and games studios have been making what they want rather than any focus on customers and worse when they fail they blame the customers and refuse to take any criticism at all.
Toxic positivity from these developers about their own games is killing the gaming industry…this has honestly killed my whole hype about the Elder Scrolls 6 in its entirely.
Id rather explore one hand crafted solar system than 100+ Procedurally generated fishbowls.
Make us WANT to live in your worlds, don't MAKE us live in them.
WHY TF IS EMIL PAGLIARULO STILL AT BETHESDA????
People high up don’t get punished.
@@Ball.Daily11 or if you are friends with the CEO LOL
At this rate I really hope Microsoft makes them give Fallout 5 to obsidian instead
That would be so amazing! Especially if they had Josh Sawyer as Creative Director.
Never gonna happen lol Get off Obsidians dick... they've made one great game and even that was 70% taken from Bethesda's Fallout 3🤣
Hoping avowed turns out good next year!
god you people are SO TIRESOME
I don't know if to Obsidian, but yes, to someone else. I noticed this about a lot of gamers, something I don't get. Why do they pay so much attention to specific studios? Or when you see Bioware, Bethesda, Blizzard, Ubisoft, all making good games at one point, but declining over time, it seems to me people shouldn't place so much emphasis on studios. I like Bethesda games, like Skyrim or Fallout 4, but I can't say I'm necessarily a fan of the studio itself or of specific people, like Howard. There is no perfect studio, just studios that haven't failed yet.
People dont want to live in their worlds. They want the world "live and flow" around them. As the players create the story they want. Its that simple
Bethesda needs to be sued for gross false advertisement at this point. Someone get a class action started.
I love Starfield and gave it a positive review. I am a fanboy with hundreds of hours in the game. Yet I just gave Shattered Space a negative review after 100%'ing all achievements and finishing it.
I left the expansion feeling bewildered: "that's it?"
I completed it in just two afternoon play sessions. I took my time. I clicked through all the dialogue, completed every quest, explored random POIs, did some bounty board stuff, checked out the other planets, everything. I even got the hidden unique armor set that people haven't caught on about yet.
Two afternoons to 100% it. No new ship parts. 4 of the 6 new weapons are re-skins. The 2 new companions are just basic crew without story quests. No new skill magazines to collect. No new powers or abilities. No new systems of any kind. All their other DLCs have expanded upon the base game, whether it's vampire lord and crossbows, or playing as a raider, whatever. Shattered Space does nothing. A mundane story to beat over a weekend and forget about.
How much did it take you in terms of time in hours? 10 hours?
I like starfield, but I don't even think I'll waste my time with shattered space. And I bought the ultimate edition....
The lack of new content here is truly baffling. How are there no unique armor and weapons? Why haven't we gotten any new powers from this eldritch horror-themed world? Why is Andreja, of all people, barely speaking about what's going on? Either the budget for this was ridiculously small or they were just being straight-up lazy. I usually hesitate to call developers that because I know how taxing it can be to work in this industry, but the sheer lack of effort and creativity leaves me little choice. Compare this to Far Harbor or any other major DLC they've done. They couldn't even manage to recreate that. My last shred of faith in this game is slowly crumbling away.
And then you consider that it took them a full year to release. For all their other games, they'd finish releasing their entire set of DLC within a year. They've taken longer than it took to make the entirety of all Fallout 4 DLC, and this is all they could put together?
Are all achievements obtainable in one play through without backup saves? Or is it like Far Harbour where different quest ones require different choices and therefore multiple play throughs / tactical manual saves.
Bethesda puts more effort in Skyrim to this day then starfield. And it makes no sense. You have a great template to work with. Space exploration. Where the hell are the aliens. Where are the different species on each planet. Where is the weapon variety based on the planet’s technology. I mean jeez they can make this such a good game if they had some imagination.
Todd Howard described "Starfield" as "Skyrim in space" during an interview, emphasizing that it incorporates elements familiar to fans of Bethesda's games, such as character customization and a robust skill system. He noted that "you’re gonna see those hallmarks in anything we do that is kind of a mainline Bethesda game."
@@refugeehugsforfree4151 customization? Skyrim had different species of people you can be. Argonians. High elf’s. Khajit. Orcs. Starfield is nothing at all like Skyrim except the way you level up. You walk through white run and see nords, imperials. Elf’s. Orcs. It has way more than starfield. Shit even fallout 4 had more. There’s no reason starfield can’t have that same variety. And if it’s supposed to be like Skyrim it should have these things.
@@Soothsayrtw Well Todd said it was, aka he lied to us all.
"Skyrim in Space" has so much heavy weight to it.
He knew what he was doing.
Lying to his overly loyal and zealous fanbase.
I Pre ordered 76 at the promise of a Coop\online Fallout, played the Beta, found out it was you doing quests by yourselves and hoping they line up with the people you play with, and you take the same amount of time and don't DC.
Canceled the preorder (Highest$ Version) never looked back at Bethesda again.
I'm done forever. Maybe till fallout 5 goes on sale.
Ya it’s actually sad that they have the tried and tested template of Skyrim and fallout and all they have to do was add a space theme the team is so uncreative space is the easiest thing to fucking write for and they blow it
That's not criticism tho...This is just a subjective take. Bethesda went with a more "realistic" or grounded approach. Kinda like The Expanse or Dune...If you want sapient aliens, there's plenty of other space games to play.
They need to improve their base game and add more features. That's the problem. Not the lack of aliens ( which are in the game btw, just not sapient ).
Time and time again, the answer reveals itself. It’s Emil. Always has been.
Its crazy I first found this channel pre-Fallout 4. I used to watch your videos of community ideas for Fallout 4 and what you wanted to be in the game. 10 years later and you're still here lmao. Keep up the good work Matty, your content is always getting better and you present your thoughts/ideas like a true journalist. I always come to you for Fallout/Bethesda news first!!
I loved starfield and give the base game a 8/10. I loved the ship building, I enjoyed a lot of the storylines like the vanguard missions and the crimson fleet missions, but I did see the flaws and some of the loading screens and lack of exploration was a let down for sure. But I like Bethesda games almost like comfort food. I just enjoy the feel of their games. After a long day I enjoy a slightly more “boring” game where I can put my controller down and just hear the music and the vibe and jump in and out of playing the game and have the more casual experience these games give
Shattered space was fun in parts for me but it definitely was a let down when Todd hyped it up as in the level of far harbor. The game just needs a couple devs who want to have more fun. There’s no little Easter eggs or cool ideas thrown in. The game feels corporate board meeting made… The dlc feels like it was generated by an A.I. there’s just a lack of human soul in it, hard to explain tbh
You know.. Having those barriers make for a better game in my opinion. Great example being i'm playing Morrowind and i can't side with House Redorran or House Hlaalu because i want to be Telvanni, i also can't be a part of the theives guild (in my playthrough) because i'm part of the fighters guild. I didn't even like it in Skyrim where you could just.. beeee everything! it meant nothing. Take the Mages Guild for example, what's the point in being archmage? just don't end it with me being archmage 😮
Oh... Things like that would give so much more meaning for NG+. Getting locked out from Freestar rangers questline, because the character is a pirate or a UC vanguard would actually inspire people to chose a different faction in NG+. As I remember Morrowind was their last when the game said "no" to the player and rejected the character based on skill-checks or reputation. People could still "improve the skills" to get in to a certain guild or create a new character with stats better fitting for that guild, but that was time consuming or needed a new character. Nowadays, with the attention spawn of the current generation, studios are expecting the majority of the players to play and finish the game only once. So these lockout mechanism got dropped in order to "not be boring" for those players or "not lock them out of content" in their first (and only) play-trough.
@@szabolcskecskes There is specifically a great thing I want to add to where you said that this is the last game that Bethesda said "no" to the player (Which I'm making a cool mod for to expand upon). There's a pop up when you OFF an ESSENTIAL character. "With this character's death, the thread of prophecy is severed. Restore a saved game to restore the weave of fate, or persist in the doomed world you have created." They actually integrated lore into the save files, and loading, there are multiple timelines being managed by Hermeous Mora and so many lead to that said doomed world so only one will be able to manifest itself; The save file your character is currently loaded on. There is sooo many things in my opinion that they've severed in the name of a populated service model instead of a video game.
@@szabolcskecskes It's absolutely an artificial locking out of content, yes. Because you can use your own mind to decide you don't want to be a member of Dark Brotherhood.
Why are people acting like Bethesda don’t want Starfield to be like Fallout or Elder Scrolls.
It has the exact same gameplay loop, but it’s just not done as well.
Todd Howard described "Starfield" as "Skyrim in space" during an interview, emphasizing that it incorporates elements familiar to fans of Bethesda's games, such as character customization and a robust skill system. He noted that "you’re gonna see those hallmarks in anything we do that is kind of a mainline Bethesda game."
Definitely think the loop is significantly different... Or at least how the loop feels is.... That is, how you explore and discover points of interests/quests in the game.
U make a space game without space exploration gameplay when exploring is your defining game identity is the dumbest thing ever done
It's Skyrim in space because you're literally just space dragon born collecting powers from space word walls. @@refugeehugsforfree4151
@@carrasco3001 Your comment made me realize something. I don't know if their game engine can support exploration on that scale for it to be good. I'm no expert, so don't quote me on this, but it seems to me their engine is good at micro stuff, as in making every object on a table interactable (is that a word?) But I think taking that and scaling it up can't be done considering how many small objects it would need to track. And so, they had to have small locations divided by loading screens, which causes an issue with exploration when you're talking about entire stellar systems. I suspect their engine can work well with a Skyrim or Fallout sized worlds, but not on a larger scale, so they had to compensate either with emptiness OR copy-pasted content. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect the engine simply wouldn't be able support thousands of interesting POIs with all the stuff in them, without breaking the world into much smaller pieces.
I really thought Shattered Space might be the moment that made me feel some fomo for not playing Starfield, but instead it's a reminder I made the right decision to pass on this game. And I wish that wasn't the case.
It was a turning point for me. I'm done with Bethesda and I do enjoy Starfield. I just thought Shattered Space would make it better.
This is gonna sound harsh to Bethesda but two things. They should really take player feedback to heart like you said. They also should really truly use RDR2 as a North Star. It’s kinda sad that Rockstar Games managed craft an open world that feels just as alive and in-depth as some of BGS’s recent RPG’s. Like it’s genuinely weird to me that RDR2 is technically a better RPG than Starfield or any recent BGS release.
Hell even the modding scene, the one thing that BGS has clung onto is now not their exclusive corner anymore. I don’t know how none of these compounding elements whether it’s developers outperforming them on a simulation level like with Red Dead Redemption 2 or the modding scene just outgrowing them with games like Cyberpunk, Witcher 3, BG3, and Doom Eternal. These moments should really push BGS to do better but somehow they remain really stagnant in an industry that’s moving so rapidly.
I don't wanna live in a game..... I want to live my life! I want to PLAY a game. Things are special because they are finite.
I like to live in Bethesdas game worlds. I beat Oblivion, Fallout 3, New Vegas, Skyrim, and FO4 once each. I have put more time into their games than any other studio, played thousands of hours into their games, made hundreds of characters always burning out at some point and getting bored. I don’t finish them because I don’t want to necessarily engage with their story. I want to create my own story in the world they made. I think a huge player base does like to ‘live’ in these worlds.
emil has been killing bethesda for years
When you stop Buying they will start Trying. The acceptance of low quality buggy products is starting to decline which is the best thing that could happen for us gamers. Its not only Bethesda but this one hurts the more because of my history with their games.
Starfield isn't an RPG. Bethesda hasn't made an RPG since Morrowind. They make Action-Adventure games.
Why should we care about game development difficulties? Like, do you care how hard is it to make a new porcessors or video cards? No, you just want a good one. The same should be for games.
Bethesda has become the pathetic 45 year old man that peaked in high school and still wears his varsity jacket....except instead of high school its Skyrim
and instead of a varsity jacket, it's Todd's favorite brown jacket
I'll be honest, I tried replaying Skyrim yesterday and after Starfield, IDK, I'm just not feeling it anymore. I get a short impulse to return, but after a few hours I'm no longer attracted to the Bethesda formula. It has potential, "go anywhere, be whoever you want to be" is a great concept still. But the formula needs to evolve and in Starfield, it didn't evolve enough. I liked Starfield, but it felt like it could/should have been so much more.
@@octavianpopescu4776 Yeah, to be fair I played Skyrim and FO4 for a long time modded and unmodded. Now if I load up either I get past the starting areas, in Skyrim I head to a location and FO4 I head to Sanctuary or beeline to Diamond City and then I basically just tune out, tab and watch stuff and close the game shortly after. Starfield I was doing that after 30 hours when I realised there are 10 different POIs, shipbuilding was utterly uninspired and the main story is just a fetch quest. What BGS needs is to get rid of Todd and Emil, they are almost certainly responsible for their games being insanely boring.
9:50 this is a point I totally disagree with Matty on. I love the idea of Bethesda focusing on "simulations" that you can "live in" that is what I want from a fantasy game. The problem is their execution in recent years. (Ideally you can have the best of both things btw)
Agreed I want elder scrolls to be less a typical open world RPG and more a fantasy life sim game!
Well sadly then, the BGS games aren't for you. BGS games were never about life SIM and making them into such will just make them another generic life SIM slop
@@mikekuzmicz8408 False. I've been doing this since Morrowind. Its the reason I fell in love with Bethesda games. I had over 400 hours on one character in Morrowind and it's been about the same in every game. I do create other characters, but that's to play as a different roles. I play these games because I feel like I can live in the world for months or longer. There are whole modding communities built around building homes farms and "Sim Settlements" to live in.
@@mikekuzmicz8408 Lol, well it looks like they are for me based on what the people who run the company are saying :)
but to be clear I never said I wanted a "life sim," but a world that at least feels like you can "live in." There is a difference.
@@mikekuzmicz8408 you clearly never played daggerfall lol
Skyrim was the last game where I made excuses and acceptions to their games being buggy, unfinished and watered down rpgs that focus more on action and exploration more than a good story or good rpg mechanics
Now they’ve also removed exploration.
I do want to live in their worlds, but the level of simulation is so shallow that any attempt to immerse myself has me bouncing off the bottom when I'm only ankle deep. The shops no longer had hours, NPCs no longer have schedules, every NPC stares at me like I have pie on my face. It''s such a weird feeling going through Starfield and being able to just see how the entire thing was designed around the player character instead of starting as a believable world.
Also I still can't believe they changed the weapon mod system from Fallout 4 so you can't loot or buy mods, you have to use the crafting system. Completely ruins a scavenger style playthrough for me.
Mods. That's the only reason why people play these games. Bethesda needs to make their base games Free since they let Modders actually do the post development anyway.. sure charge for DLC and Bigger Mods Creators but make the base game Free.
Wait, make the game free and pay for mods? Instead of the way it's always been, buy a game once and mod it for years for free? You're a Bethesda employee, aren't you? 'Cause that's a pretty anti-gamer attitude ya got there. Give me Nexus mods any day over paid mods. $20 for a gun, lol.
Nah the reason I bought Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fallout 4 and Skyrim was for the vanilla games not mods. The reason I go back to most of those games nowadays is partly because of the mods. If people only played those games because of mods then the games would've flopped on consoles which didn't have mod support.
Nonsense. Skyrim is great - even now in 2024 - without mods. This idiotic excuse that mods keep those games surviving must stop. Majority of Skyrim players have never used any mods. We modders are a small community. Please, get out of your bubble.
Only thing I disagree with Matty on is we DO want to live in these worlds. I feel like Skyrim, Oblivion, and all the fallouts did that.
Yes, me too.
We do want to live in these worlds because is more fun to play the game as a sandbox than an RPG, and that fact is because of the main story is poorly written and doesn't compels you to follow it to try to know what will happen IMO. We all know that the side quest at far way better that the main story, which usually is more an excuse to play the game rather than an interesting story.
Starfield: "The biggest and best space game ever made...:
No Man's Sky: "Sure bud."
NMS is a cartoony sandbox walking simulator for little boys, come on.....
No Mans Sky has been on the market 5+ years. Starfield has been on the market for 1 year. Don't you think 4+ years is a lot more time to develop content? Not making excuses, but that is a dumb argument.
@@numb1gxfan 8 exactly.
@@Kris.G But Starfield is a wide, shallow puddle for people who can't be bothered to figure out what better game to play, so they just settle for one of the most meh games ever to have been created. Stuff is there, surface level polish, but nothing more. It's an exploration game without exploration, a shooter without interesting enemies or weapons that relies on bullet sponge for "difficulty", an RPG without choices, interesting characters or good stories... it's just consistently, across the board, just below average.
@@Axterix13 and which of these aspects does NMS improve on? The only, obvious one is the exploration without loading screens. Apart from that, Starfield does everything better. NMS is (not even) a shooter without interesting enemies, not an rpg, no choices or interesting characters or good stories, it's just consistently, across the board, just below average. It's a walking simulator for people who like to collect resources and look at a procedurally generated colour-fest.
Paglurilo just needs to leave, he's a talentless hack that fluked on the Dark Brotherhood questline.
Shattered Space was another faction city, like Akhila or Atlantis or Neon or the Key. With a similar amount of side content.
If Bethesda were realistic about this, and its value (max 1/4 of the base game), people would be less disappointed.
Using steam charts for primarily an Xbox game is always weird to me. There’s thousands upon thousands playing on Xbox, for free too with game pass. Just an odd thing to use for player reference.
If Emil is still around after ES6 flops...bro
Emil Pagliarulo is out of touch? No way! *Shocked Pikachu face*
when Paul Tassi, the ultimate shill, gives your dlc below a 7, you know you've fucked up.
He gave the base game 9.5/10. Which means he's lying or never played the game.
@@earlofdoncaster5018or maybe he just, you know, actually like it?
@@torrb420 I guess it would be worth 9.5 if it wasn't for the dull bits in between the loading screens.
@@earlofdoncaster5018 or maybe someone had a differing opinion than to yours.
@@torrb420 I don't think that even Starfield's mum would give it a 9.5.
Keep in mind that a 10k for Fallout 76 is massively more beneficial financially for BGS than any other BGS game, because they’ve been killing it with the Atom Shop and people must be throwing so much money at BGS weekly.
I was a Fallout 76 hater myself, but I let its claws sink deeply into me somehow, and now I can’t quit playing it for many unforeseen or not-so-obvious reasons. Send help, Matty!
I might be in the minority, but I do appreciate the ability to "live in the world" in a Bethesda games. I genuinely think radiant quests are a great feature of a Bethesda game... in theory. I think a game like Elder Scrolls should have endlessly recurring generic bounty missions, just for example, because that allows you to further immerse yourself in that "life"... BUT the problem is Bethesda at some point thought that the endless randomized filler was what people liked their games for. Radiant quests are a nice addition, but they aren't why I bought the game. The hand crafted content should ALWAYS come first. With Starfield, they basically just let their randomizer make the entire game while they dotted in little pockets of disconnected REAL content, much of which was small scale nothing-burger quests or just plain boring. None of the factions feel real or fleshed out, none of the planets MEAN ANYTHING to the larger picture. It's basically a wallpaper generator with amateurish entry level missions placed randomly throughout.
They’ve been lost since Skyrim. It’s a fact. And they act like it’s because our standards are too high when it’s literally them ripping any and all rpg elements. And they actually think that’ll make them more money.
I actually think that Bethesda needs a leadership shuffle-up. They are losing their core market rapidly
10:58 I mean, I do like living in the world, especially when I get to customize my apartment or settlements in the game. Takes me a while to make it exactly exactly the way I want it.
I don't have the patience or imagination for interior/exterior design which makes this aspect of Bethesda games unappealing to me. I love the fact the ship habs are pre designed otherwise I'd be flying empty husks. Because if you're not into building outposts, then the living thing in Starfield is rather pointless.
Emil Pagliarulo is to blame for Bethesdas fall, he need to go. Or else both elder scrolls 6 and fallout 5 is in danger
Can’t spell Emil Pagliarulo without “Liar”
Starfield really is a stinker. The fact that they're doubling down on this game as being so apparently great is very disheartening
Can I just say, as much as people hate Starfield and Shattered space, I thought the introduction to the DLC was really good.
The Oracle space station was such a cool location, both in terms of its atmosphere and as a dungeon. I wish Starfield had more locations like it. It makes me realize that, despite being a Bethesda title, Starfield is woefully lacking when it comes to dungeons, and especially good dungeons with atmosphere, environmental storytelling, puzzles, and verticality.
But this is what is so heartbreaking. There are fantastic elements in the base game as well, but it's all so shallow and underdeveloped.
Todd Howard described "Starfield" as "Skyrim in space" during an interview, emphasizing that it incorporates elements familiar to fans of Bethesda's games, such as character customization and a robust skill system. He noted that "you’re gonna see those hallmarks in anything we do that is kind of a mainline Bethesda game."
Michael Kirkbride's return needed expeditiously
Starfield could be Bethesda's crown jewel if they want it to be. They just have to put in the effort to make quality updates and content. This could be talked about the same way we talk about Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky.
The fact that many of us visited Nuka World or Far Harbor recently says...EVERYTHING. Or replayed Danse's romance dialogue just to watch those gorgeous brown eyes widen in disbelief when he asks, "You love me?" OR my personal favorite, "Where do you want me?"