I actually liked a lot of 76 at the beginning. I thought it captured a lot of what it would be like to be one of the first ones out of a vault. But that also became its weakness. It was…lonely. And that got old.

dcaggie04 said:

---

And no Fallout 76 is in no way shape or form better than Starfield. That is a ludicrous opinion.

---

Must be a lot of ludicrous people
Starfield is rated even lower on Steam than Fallout 76 now (pcgamesn.com)

I am a huge Fallout fan. It is certainly one of my favorite franchises. I loved the empty world of FO76. It fit perfectly into what I pictured it would be like exiting a vault after 20 years. Everything still being dilapidated also made sense versus some of the other games where no one has ever bothered to sweep anything 100 years later. I disagree that there were no quests you would expect from Fallout. I think there were some great quests - Mistress of Mysteries and the DMV quest being two examples.

That being said I know my opinion is highly in the minority on this and it it should also be noted that FO76 wasn't on steam until the Wastelanders update. If it had been on steam at launch the reviews would be a few orders of magnitude worse.

DallasTeleAg said:

---

And I'm sure review bombing had nothing to do with that....

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/09/05/starfield-gender-controversy-some-gamers-go-viral-and-face-ridicule-over-extreme-reactions-to-pronouns/?sh=2662fcc5b3ae

People are for sure review bombing it.

AgDev01 said:

---

I am a huge Fallout fan. It is certainly one of my favorite franchises. I loved the empty world of FO76. It fit perfectly into what I pictured it would be like exiting a vault after 20 years. Everything still being dilapidated also made sense versus some of the other games where no one has ever bothered to sweep anything 100 years later. I disagree that there were no quests you would expect from Fallout. I think there were some great quests - Mistress of Mysteries and the DMV quest being two examples.

That being said I know my opinion is highly in the minority on this and it it should also be noted that FO76 wasn't on steam until the Wastelanders update. If it had been on steam at launch the reviews would be a few orders of magnitude worse.

---

Sure it didn't come out on Steam until later, but as I said in my original hot take... at this moment in time, F76 is a better game than Starfield, overall. I doubt it will stay that way as Starfield adds more content.

https://www.ign.com/articles/bethesda-is-responding-to-negative-reviews-of-starfield-on-steam

Bethesda having their CS respond to bad reviews on Steam. Not a great look. Only time I've seen this effectively done is when changes have been made to a game that addresses specific feedback, but leaving a message that basically says "you didn't look hard enough for the fun" just comes off as a bit desperate.

Good lord that is bad. Nothing drives me more crazy than hearing game devs/designers respond "You're playing it wrong!" when the players don't like or do something the way the developers think they should.

Fenrir said:

---

Artorias said:

---

Good lord that is bad. Nothing drives me more crazy than hearing game devs/designers respond "You're playing it wrong!" when the players don't like or do something the way the developers think they should.

---

I would say that there is an argument to be made that if players are playing it "wrong" then you probably built the game wrong.

---

Exactly

Tried it, meh, think I'm done after 10 hours. What a disappointment. I can relate to all of the prior criticism, it's just a frustrating experience. Got FFXV1 half off on the PS5 the other day, maybe I'll give that a go.

I agree.

For example, what if there were certain quest lines, space ports, or planets in the game that were locked unless you were a member of an elite traders guild? In order to get an invite to that guild, you had to grow your own exporting business by building mining facilities and setting up trade routes or something. This would get you renown with certain factions that then opened up access to that exclusive content. These facilities would also be open to attack by pirates, or perhaps more powerful trading companies hiring mercs to slow you down.

That same idea can be extended across just about everything else in the game, like piracy, smuggling, mercenary work, etc. Now, you have goals to attain and can really lean into the role playing element of what I thought we were getting with Starfield. Let me truly play a role like that, reward me for playing those roles, and allow my decisions to impact the world around me.

The game is basically 5-6 very well crafted long questlines with some small encounters around the galaxy. Combat was better than past games, but nowhere near as fun as a game like Cyberpunk.

I really like the skill tree, but the progress seems very slow. Looking at the skills I had after my first play through, you would have to play for over 120 hours to unlock even 30% of the skills.

Itemization seemed a little lack luster, but not too bad. I love finding the magazines and other small buffs around the galaxy. Those types of micro rewards for exploring a cave, starport, etc should always be included.

I felt that it really need some type of risk or extreme resource build up for deep space exploration. Rather than just autojumping from planet to planet with ease until I got there. Perhaps maybe a need to even build outposts along the way to make those deep treks possible. And even more rare and harder to get resources the further you went into deep space. It just felt like as far as resources went, there was point and worse they were always easy to obtain. I remember way back in Star Wars Galaxies MMO if you wanted to craft an elite item you'd need extremely are resources and they were often on planets like Dathomir where you really couldn't easily survive so it took some heavy risk and payoff. Starfield needed that too I think.

It's a good, competently made game wherein Bethesda tried some new things for them. I don't think it really hit the mark, though - while there's crafting and space combat and base building and survival elements, it doesn't feel that they fully committed to any of them.

I think Bethesda was also a little hurt by moving away from one of their primary strengths - building a cohesive, bespoke, and interesting world. You can get hints of it in the pre-built settlements, but I never got the sense of enjoyment out of exploring the procedurally-generated planets in Starfield like I did the various nooks and crannies of Skyrim or post-apocalyptic Boston. To be clear, I totally get that wasn't what they were going for, but still a disappointment to me.

Teslag said:

---

I felt that it really need some type of risk or extreme resource build up for deep space exploration. Rather than just autojumping from planet to planet with ease until I got there. Perhaps maybe a need to even build outposts along the way to make those deep treks possible. And even more rare and harder to get resources the further you went into deep space. It just felt like as far as resources went, there was point and worse they were always easy to obtain. I remember way back in Star Wars Galaxies MMO if you wanted to craft an elite item you'd need extremely are resources and they were often on planets like Dathomir where you really couldn't easily survive so it took some heavy risk and payoff. Starfield needed that too I think.

---

You want Elite Dangerous.

So long Starfield, it was an un-fun 10 hours, so I fired up FF XVI and wow, what an opening scene, the first 15 minutes until you get to the training, which is pretty cool too.

Teslag said:

---

Starfield's biggest problem is the simply question of "why"



Why am I doing all this exploring, base building, resource gathering etc if there is no reason for something bigger in the game. You ask "why?" way too many times in this game.

---

This is why I no longer like these massive open-world games. Most of them suffer from this problem.

Mass Effect is the best RPG model in my opinion. Plenty of open-world aspects, but it's constantly being driven by a narrative that gives you a reason to engage with the open world. I don't like doing things for no reason with no payoff, and that's what a lot of these games have turned into.

oof

Skyrim co-op modder gives up on developing Starfield Together because "this game is f*****g trash" | VG247

Basically this review, where he's comparing mechanics and gameplay to a game with soul and creativity. It's no contest. That first fight was about as uninspiring as you can get. Terrible mechanics, and weapon sounds, and was basically a disjointed mess from the beginning. Loved Fallout 3, NV, Skyrim, Fallout 4 was ok, but I sure didn't expect the Fallout 3-type dialogue 16 years later, or to hate the unintuitive UI, menus and inventory management as much as I did. Just screams of laziness, and at least it was on Gamepass so I didn't drop $65 on it. But will glady drop the cash for Balder's Gate 3 once I finish FFXVI...Different strokes for different folks, but the consistency of the complaints about this game are hard to ignore.

I'll be that guy... BG3 is overrated. Fine game, but the hype eveyone is throwing at itis crazy.

DallasTeleAg said:

---

I'll be that guy... BG3 is overrated. Fine game, but the hype eveyone is throwing at itis crazy.

---

The level of praise it is getting is a bit overstated, but overall it is a very well done and impressive amount of content. I have no issue with it winning GOTY among other awards.

Really solid update from Bethesda for Starfield. They also confirmed that they are currently working on adding a land vehicle for the future

Finally, we get a 40 and 60 FPS mode for the Series X. As someone that has a nice 120 Hz VRR tv, I've been patiently waiting for more devs to give us more options at 40 or 60.

I've also just purchased a Steam Deck and I enjoy streaming games from my Series X to my handheld. It's only logical to turn down the visuals and crank up the performance for the smaller screens. It's a great way to knock out side-quests, etc. in these massive games.

All the updates sound good... I'm not currently playing the game anymore, but I will once the new content drops.

I don't disagree with any of that. I'm just a sucker for space games and space movies, so I'm looking for a reason to go back. But I'm with you... I have very little desire to redo any of the main story stuff which was ridiculously repetitive! I just want to explore new areas and new story lines.

I actually just recently "beat" the game. Fortunately, I have save files before I made the final decision.... seeing that they now let you change your traits, etc. for New Game + tells me that I will need to go back to an old save so I can start over when the DLC releases.

Yeah, I think for me it's going to take at least several more of these "content updates" (read: taking the 40% of the game they released and getting it closer to 80% of what they actually promised) for me to get interested again and I will never pre-order another Bethesda product again.

The game just wasnt very good when it was released. Calling it mid would be nice.

But since I own it, I'll keep an eye on it and see if its better in a year or two. It seems like that's what happened with Fallout 76, it just took a long time, and I still havent played that game for more than 5-10 minutes.

What starfield needs is simply a purpose and consequence for doing things in the game. At present there aren't any. Space needs to have that risk of being stranded or killed easily in the expanse. It doesn't have that. Unlimited fuel means you can get anywhere you want at any time. No need for outposts or resource gathering. Nothing rare in the expanse far away so why go there. And why get them if they serve no purpose?