40 Minutes Of Starfield Gameplay Have Leaked Online

[Kokoloko]

Death Stranding >>>>> Starfield

Hey now Xbox has a ”walking simulator” without the good stuff.
The walking talking simulator

 

[anonpuffs]

The devs themselves criticized the game? What was said, exactly?

there was a small leak last year that made the rounds, i think it might have been schreier, before the delay from 11/11/22 to this year, that the game wasn't fun.

here's one link i found covering it

 

[Darth Vader]

So more and more dicey things shown up lately…
What’s your final MC score prediction?
I say 78-82

90 to 92.

 

[Frozone]

Probably around 84-87 MC

 

[Puff]

So more and more dicey things shown up lately…
What’s your final MC score prediction?
I say 78-82

90+

 

[Dabaus]

Nvm.

 

[riesgoyfortuna]

OK? I guess.

Look if the game is good, then it's good. There is no sense in hating MS or it's products so badly that you make it some personal vendetta to shit on anything they make that's exclusive just because of a "we must win the console war" mentality.

Some of you have already prepped for reviews of the game to score well because the sites "will be shill MS gaming sites". Someone complained about not having realworld physics as if that's something to dock points from a videogame because...it's a game? It just seems like to me that most of these responses are trying to mitigate the product just because it's a MS exclusive.

We all remember halo infinite reviews

 

[riesgoyfortuna]

This is a non-argument and really shouldn't be talked about further. Everyone knew everything there was to know about Starfield from when they first announced it to all the demos and presentations they gave. Suddenly coming up with a "negative" on the game after the fact is just justifying bashing the game. So.. just bash the game because it's a MS game and admit it and move on so we can ignore the silly complaints.

Dude, i wanna give you the benefit of the doubt, but fuck me if you losing it defending this game, its not about if its. Good or bad, its the usual lies of hines and todd this is nothing New

 

[riesgoyfortuna]

No rovers because of "realism".

Wow that looks bad

 

[Dabaus]

From day one Starfield looked boring to me because “realistic space” with nasa punk artstyle just isn’t all that interesting. Mass effect 1 did sci-fi in the future with exploration the correct way. Planets are going to be boring and empty that’s why only so many are explorable. Plus the different alien races added characterization that starfield just can’t do. Shame EA ruined the franchise with andromeda.

This isn’t even console wars, starfield just looks uninteresting to me. With all that said I don’t think gamers are going to be missing out playing this unless you’re a die hard Bethesda fan.

 

[Say1nMan]

The pop-ins of the rocks and some instances mere inches away from you...yikes.

 

[Yobo]

Going with an 83

 

[BroodCorp]

Starfield is supposed to represent a turning point in Microsoft's 1P output, outside of their traditional staple.

But this isn’t true. I don’t think any reasonable person believes any one game could do this. I don’t even believe that’s what Microsoft wants, considering they’ve never labeled Starfield as such.

Seems to me like it’s a huge game they’re happy to have. The overall strategy seems to still favor fisting the general public with GamePass though. I don’t think MS is counting on any one game unless you can cite otherwise.

 

[Would_you_kindly]

But this isn’t true. I don’t think any reasonable person believes any one game could do this. I don’t even believe that’s what Microsoft wants, considering they’ve never labeled Starfield as such.

Seems to me like it’s a huge game they’re happy to have. The overall strategy seems to still favor fisting the general public with GamePass though. I don’t think MS is counting on any one game unless you can cite otherwise.

Someone at Microsoft certainly has insinuated these when they said starfield is a turning point for Xbox or something , I'm sure someone on here will provide the receipts

 

[FIREK2029]

Geezus, it’s worse than I imagined.

Imagine not having rovers because of realism. What a fail.

 

[Nimrota]

Wow so straight up lying then. Absolutely amazing. I knew this would be the case considering no land traversal mechanics. Either the playable zones would be small, or they would use fast travel to get you back to the ship if you ran far away and could only slowly return. Knowing Bethesda, the former was more likely.

 

[Nimrota]

The devs themselves criticized the game? What was said, exactly?

From this GQ article: "Howard admits, explaining that Starfield only “clicked” into feeling fun to play as late as last year. [2022]"
Pretty grim your game in development for, how many years was it? 8? 10? 25?, only started to feel fun less than a year before release.

 

[Would_you_kindly]

Geezus, it’s worse than I imagined.

Imagine not having rovers because of realism. What a fail.

You'll see the faithful crying about NASA working with Bethesda for realism but this is set 300 years in the future & is a game not real life

 

[Would_you_kindly]

Wow so straight up lying then. Absolutely amazing. I knew this would be the case considering no land traversal mechanics. Either the playable zones would be small, or they would use fast travel to get you back to the ship if you ran far away and could only slowly return. Knowing Bethesda, the former was more likely.

Anyone that actually believed this game would be anymore technically advanced than other games is a complete moron this is creation engine they should know that the engine isn't going to advance 20 years because of the magic Microsoft engineers

 

[Would_you_kindly]

Sure it might've improved slightly but comeon it's always been shite no way could they have overhauled it to stand up to modern engines