it was so annoying having people tell me the scope of this game was so monstrous for months on end only for it to end up this very segmented and limited rpg experience
Starfield | Review & Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
It's really ridiculous how Hogwarts Legacy makes load between the section of the castle seamless and this has loading screens... lol
... but I had a load each time I opened a door to the outside from within the castle or entering the castle from outside. Platinumed the game - love it - but there were def wierd loading elements.
The load is seamless and it barely lasts a second, the screen doesn't fade, a much better and elegant solution than Starfield's.
The more I see of Starfield there's one thing that hasn't changed for me still and that is the art style/aesthetic. I have not warm up to the aesthetic of this game. In my opinion, the game's looks lack that certain flash that certain pop. There's a blandness and as a result I don't sense the charm or personality coming from Starfield as compared to what Fallout and Elder Scrolls had.
It is def better! On PS5 at least a couple of seconds (at least mine)
Play the game on newgame+ to enjoy it
The new sales pitch from the conmen
The new sales pitch from the conmen
Last edited:
Devs said its a modern engine, and its vastly improved from creation engine 1. I'm sideing with the people that acually make the games. Not a random user on a forum. You're talking about performance of the game. it just needs better optimizations for some users. I expect a update or 2 before Early Access is over.
So I am a few hours in. I got to new Atlantis. At least it feels like a few hours. Could have been one in all honesty.
Again, my impressions have nothing to do with the game being on Xbox. I am not interested in platform wars. I am interested in quality though, and platforms actually having fun games to play.
Getting up to New Atlantis .... these are my thoughts. Maybe some mild spoilers. I have gone into this game cold so I could go into it without knowing really anything about it.
The intro section is quite dry. It's literally you just using that mining tool we've seen inside of a mine shaft where you are doing some work with a crew. Then you find some rock that makes you see "visions", and this is what gets you started on the journey. It is nearly identical to Mass Effect and how Shepard touches the beacon and has visions he doesn't understand. Which I am sure is also used in a lot of other mediums, so absolutely nothing original there.
Then you meet up with Barrett (this scene has also been seen many times, and what's with them basically stealing the FF7 character and putting him in a space suit here? lol).
And thi sis where the first firefight happens and holy cow .... it is bad. I have not played such a poor feeling "shooter" in I don't know how long. The mechanics and feel are horrific, and the "melee" ... I wasn't even sure it was a melee the first few times I saw it, until I confirmed I was hitting people. But there is no feeling of weight or that you're actually doing anything when you fight. On top of that, it just doesn't control well. Goldeneye was a groundbreaking game in its time but going back to It, the shooting feels really clunky and old fashioned. This feels like that IMO. It's horrific.
Then you get into space and you get to "fly". Space combat, is again, horrific. You're not actually flying. The background is a like a static skybox that is around you, and the only way you can tell you're moving is with debris that is floating by, or other ships. Combat reminded me of Wing Commander on the SNES/PC from the 90s. Now I really liked those games back in the day, but I think these games have come a decent way since then. I was honestly shocked when I discovered what "flying" entailed.
The music is average. It seems to heavily rely on what you might call typical "space exploration" compositions, but it sounds like an imitation to me. Not something trying to be itself, for better or worse. "Be awed," the music might be telling me, while a giant moon floats in front of my ship that neither grows nor shrinks no matter how I move. Unfortunately I'm not buying it. The music is clearly not as good as Skyrim as the compositions feel less "authentic" and also lack the sophisticated melodic and harmonic content that Jeremy Soule seemed to always bring to the table.
The robot sidekick ... Vosco or something like that? Feels like a cross between TARS from Interstellar and ED-209 from Robocop. And as sophisticated as the robot is, it has that old 50s sci fi robot voice that gets insufferable to listen to over long stretches. Apparently in their universe they can travel via warp drive, but haven't mastered making a decent sounding synthetic voice, which is something that already exists in our world today.
The character creation is an abomination. I know this is par for the course for a lot of these games, but good luck putting together someone with a decent haircut. I'm not sure why there was no good option for a simple "buzz cut" (how I look) but there is an AWESOME option if you have a combover that is two feet long in length. Who is making these choices over there?
I think the graphics are fine. Maybe even "good" at parts, but certainly not great. Part of that is the theme is cool IMO, and it's easy to have a sci fi aesthetic that is fun. And I think rendering hard surfaces is pretty easy to make look good these days (rock outcroppings, metal ships, etc). So yeah, I don't really have complaints. And the frame rate actually seemed fine aside from a few places where it briefly seemed to freeze. But again, that stuff doesn't tend to bug me if the rest of the game is good. I care more about the overall experience. But it's nowhere close to an anything that's in the top tier PS5 league. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Another quick note. I was playing the game thinking "this feel like someone loved Interstellar and thought it would be cool to copy." Then I had a friend text later saying "Starfield really reminds me of Interstellar." It's pretty blatant IMO.
Again, I'm only at New Atlantis. It could change, but I feel like I've already kind of experienced the core of the game. And that's not changing. It's one of the biggest let downs I've ever seen so far. I'll put more time into it this weekend to see if it starts feeling interesting. I haven't even been sent on my quest yet, but what I've experienced so far indicates to me it is not worth the time it would require to complete.
I can't imagine what would have happened if this game launched a year ago.
Edit: I forgot to mention all the traveling seems to be done in menus. It doesn't even feel like a game world. It feels like a bunch of small areas glued together with loading screens.
No way. I finished FFXVI and am playing Starfield now.
FFXVI had some moments of real spectacle that looked awesome. And there was some great stuff on display in cutscenes. Yeah they had some NPC moments that came across PS3/360 level, but that games faults are nothing in the realm of Starfield IMO.
Starfield so far is outdated garbage.
Why not a 5? I don't agree with the game industry's trend to make 8 practically a baseline score and anything below that is crap. This game is reviewing around where Returnal landed, and that game was a legit GotY and was an incredibly great game. The scales are completely out of whack at times.
This game is bad.
And as it stands right now, if Starfield were deleted from gaming existence no one should rightfully care. So maybe it shouldn't exist.
Last edited:
Sure sounds like a 5/10. Hoping Edge delivers - especially because *checks notes* they gave fallout New Vegas, one of the GOAT RPGs, a fucking 6.
It lasts about a second if that & that's only because they were constrained by PS4 / Xbox one & switch
People have already explained to you how the code is still based on an engine from 1997 that's not modern you
Old code can still be good though. There is kernel code running on modern platforms that is decades old.People have already explained to you how the code is still based on an engine from 1997 that's not modern you
The problem is it seems like the engine is just poorly done. It is really easy to write bad code. And then when you get to the size and scope of a game like any Bethesda game, you can have an engine that resembles the software equivalent of Jenga under the hood; Nearly impossible to change things without it wanting to come tumbling down.
By all evidence, they just aren't a great tech company. They have big ideas, and big aspirations but not the ability to execute. And this is not something you can just "throw money" at and have it get magically solved. Programming at that level requires real skill and craftsmanship that comes from years of experience AND actual talent and ability. Some people just don't have it, but those people are still out there working.
I think the bottom line is just that Bethesda is sub par at doing what they need to do to bring an up-to-snuff RPG out these days. There is no way in hell they can get away with what they are putting out here for ES6.
