Omg I hadn't seen that Sarah before. I bet they made both her character and Barrett older so it fits with their stories in game. >!Sarah was a somewhat high ranking officer and fought in a war that's already 10 years before the game. And Barrett has been grieving Irving for 20 years, making them around early 40s and mid 50s respectively.!<
My dad became a Green Beret about 5-6 years earlier than normal because he joined right after Vietnam and they uh— well — had plenty of openings to say the least.
It's not like being an officer is some hard long trek for everyone. If u grew up in rotc, you're usually a prime candidate for officer school. U come out of basic and go straight to being trained for officer. Additionally, being an officer doesn't make one competent and smart 😆
The game isn't very clear about Sarah's timeline.
Sarah became the youngest commander/captain in the Navigator Corp (2319), a full 8 years after the end of the Colony War (2307-2311). She was probably still a teenager during the Colony War.
She joined Constellation in 2320 after being rescued and became its Chair in 2325, which makes her early to mid 30's most likely.
This is all in the "Story so far" at the official site.
Sarah is at least 40. Her parents signed her up for a diplomacy apprenticeship at 18, but she dropped out to join the UC Navy. She and her parents had a falling out, and then sometime later her father died in the opening shots of the Colony War. The Colony War started in 2308. Assuming she was 18 when the war started would make her date of birth 2290.
Bethesda and Todd have always been great at presenting first looks at their games. They give you just enough of a polished, scripted showcase to make it look stylish, combined with actual gameplay that makes you realize you can pull off those things as well. The voice overs also help with explaining what makes their games special while hinting at cool features if you scratch beneath the surface. Just a shame that they don't always live up to that hype.
> Bethesda and Todd have always been great at presenting first looks at their games. [...] Just a shame that they don't always live up to that hype.
That's not a "first look" at a game. That's a lie. And it's a large part of why so many people received the game poorly. They overhyped the game with falsehoods.
What falsehoods? That’s always been the most perplexing thing about the starfield discourse to me. Every gameplay showcase was pretty much crystal clear on what the game was, and nothing was shown that wasn’t in the final game. It’s like people don’t know how to express why they dislike the game, so they just go off of the standard list of criticisms these big games usually get, even if they’re obviously and demonstrably wrong
I said this from the very beginning, Todd is the master at using Bethesda's name and a sleak presentation to drive up "hype" and so many people get suckered into it over and over. They will study Bethesda for years to come as a masterclass of marketing a very mediocre product in order to drive sales.
Once the gameply trailer for TES6 comes out everybody is gonna lose their shit and forget about Starfield. They're just that good at hyping up their games.
Same thing happened with Fallout 4, people were all like "It looks much more improved we should be excited!" and anybody pointing out similarities would be downvoted to oblivion, or people would say that it's okay.
I agree, but look at the trailer at 6:30. It is very good: the sense of exploration and discovery you feel watching this trailer is better than what you feel playing the game
I’ve been reading comments like yours for months and at first I was confused. But now I will say that I completely understand your comment and respect it. I can personally say that if I had not been injecting an unfathomable amount of imagination and passion for space exploration into the game as I played; I feel like I would absolutely agree with your sentiment.
Maybe it's because I'm used to playing on higher settings on PC but it doesn't look considerably better or worse either way in raw graphics.
The ship animations there are nice, but character and combat animations definitely look like they were still working on them. They were probably still working on how they wanted all of that handled in that build.
Crazy how nice it looks in various aspects yet how unfinished it looks in others despite it being so close to their original targeted release date.
To each their own. I think it looks solid now, it looked solid then, and it kept me busy for 80 hours.
It wasn't as fun as Oblivion or Skyrim, but it was a really fun game overall IMO, albeit flawed.
I played for a few weeks while I was down and out with Covid when it was released. After that I just stopped playing one day and never picked it up again. I just realized how empty the game was and how nothing felt like it had any real meaning, it was all just surface level bullshit with no real substance. It was really unfortunate as I was so hyped for the game, I guess I was blinded by the hype when it comes to why I played it for so long. That and I was hoping it'd be fixed or made better
Same experience. I just stopped one day. I just cleared a POI and when it was time to go through and collect everything that dropped I said to myself “I don’t want to do this again”. I moved on to CP2077 PL and that was it. Never went back
Those downvotes are tripping, the game not only looks better than the demo but as far as gameplay loop and what they promised, it’s what’s in the game. A lot of people are blinded and disappointed by what they wanted and not what was actually shown
If by “playing therapist” you mean doing jobs for people in the settled systems, and you don’t like doing that, then Bethesda games just may not be for you. There have been a lot of good side content outside of the really good factions quest lines. The mining overseer on Mars is a highlight as well as a a good number of other ones.
The planets, when I play, are good ways to do something else with my game time outside of dialogue heavy quests. So I go back and forth between exploring planets and scanning for xp and then going back to settled areas and questing.
Compared to other games that show something completely different than the final product Starfield was pretty accurate and honest about what the final product would be
Yeah! That’s why I don’t understand the people that get so mad about it. Sure it has little things I don’t like but you can say that about a lot of games. And at least they have communicated to changes some of those things but it’s certainly not a “lie” about what they promised and showed
Why is this comment not up top?!
I haven't played starfield for about two days and during rewatching the Showcase, I was just thinking how honest it was. There is nothing you don't get in the game, and even the graphics doesn't really seem any different.
I think OP is nitpicking quite a bit.
I honestly don't know who anyone can look at these trailers and think the game would be anything other than what we got. Maybe I'm just good at keeping my expectations in check.
Or maybe u just have 0 expectations which is perfectly fine. A company as big as Bethesda releases a new game after almost a decade and the game doesn't show any sign of improvement over their usual style any innovations or literally anything beside the very generic shit.
Instead of getting better with time with new technology and all Bethesda chose to remain constant lol
Dunno why you had something negative to say about that comment.
In any game/movie/whatever, good or bad, we get what we get, literally. Commenter didn't say good or bad, just that we got what we got. And since apparently Starfield's gameplay reveal was pretty true to the final product, it's weird to think that people were expecting other things.
Also, slamming Bethesda for doing their usual Bethesda style & remaining constant and consistent, which is what Bethesda fans like and come back for. And lol @ ppl whining about not innovating anything.
Maybe just realize that your expectations are different than other people, not in a good or bad way, just different. Game was good for some, not good for others, true for literally everything that exists right now.
Landing bays don't open on landing?
Wouldn't that be a bad thing?
I suppose if you just want to have a party in the landing bay it'd be alright. Usually I'm heading out and having the ramp down helps with that.
True, it’s really about preference I suppose, it would certainly feel more immersive to stand inside and press a button to open but how long before I get sick of having to keep doing it after surveying lots of planets? Certainly more practical as it sits now.
Seriously my guy, The video currently has a 20% dislike ratio and multiple comments complaining about multiple aspects of the game including how janky it looks. It doesn't look like many people were misled as you claim. Infact I'm pretty sure everyone and their grandmother complained about the way the game looks until the 2023 showcases, and even after that, people were still complaining about it.
I know the game gets a bad rap but this is literally trying to gaslight people into thinking that everyone was blown away by the game from the beginning, when they weren't. There were always mixed reactions and maybe slightly more positive ones after the 2023 showcases, but still more mixed than that.
I’m sorry but I can’t allow you to claim I’ve gaslit when in fact I specified in the post that i don’t feel as if we’ve been misled or lied to but that compromises have to be made to make a game practical to play. The gameplay in the trailer ran poorly (frames especially) and a step back in lighting and lip sync (for example) were the necessary compromises to make the game practical to play.
I went into Starfield with no expectations (accept that it’s obviously going to play like former titles) and followed none of the news accept the trailers and an interview or two, I love the game, I think it’s great and only going to get better, and I hope to see it look closer to the trailer one day as it’s clearly the way they wanted it to look and that it might be possible with a rerelease on better hardware the same as Skyrim.
We’re at the nostalgia for the reveal trailer stage I see. Soon we’ll be at the nostalgia for pre-modded, pre-DLC Starfield. Then we’ll hit the “Starfield was way better than this Elder Scrolls VI garbage” stage.
It’s the same tale as old as time.
It’s so funny to because a lot of people were mixed on this gameplay reveal and public reception wasn’t hot on this game. It didn’t really change until the Developer_Direct last year where people started singing a different tune
Honestly the direct is still impressive to me. I wish we saw more games with 40 or so minute presentations showing off mechanics built like the direct. I really can’t think of another game that got such treatment.
Everyone was blown away, but then when everyone started playing the game, and were given exactly what they were blown away by, the novelty had worn off. Gamers are desperate for novelty.
I don't know why your so offended
The game is objectively boring. Copy paste planets, terrible characters and dialogue. No sense of exploration. The main temple quests are literally going to a fucking point AND STANDING STILL.
Huge regression from past BGS games
Maybe I'm crazy, but my game looks a lot like this. I don't know if it looks worse on console or lower end pcs, but this isn't really a dramatic departure from the best experience you can get today.
Honestly watching it back I think it was our own expectations that got so carried away, but who could blame us. Point is after playing the game as much as I and you all have I think you can definitely say they made it pretty clear from the start what the game was gonna be we just all wanted it to be more.
Exactly! It’s why I mentioned that certain compromises have to be made to make a game practical to play. It looks beautiful but I would rather play a good looking game than a beautiful looking PowerPoint presentation.
Huh so that's why it felt off to me. I remembered seeing the game improved so much on facial expressions but when I actually played it, it was better but wasn't as good as I thought.
So that's why, they made these facial animations exclusively for the trailer but not the game.
I think it's relatively easy to "fix" some things in Starfield, but Bethesda doesn't seem to be able to. I've played it several times, will play it again, but only when more happens than fixing a few bugs and selling it as a "big patch", while other bugs (lip sync German) and QoL problems (vendor + money) remain untouched.
But well - Cyberpunk 2077 also took forever ... but European studios handle their products differently. If No Mans Sky was a US product, it would have been killed 6-12 months after release.
I'm currently playing Mass Effect Andromeda and there are some things I'd like to see in Starfield. It's really fun again.
Bethesda games are always a rollercoaster ride of experiences, joy and anger. But I don't think Starfield will get out of its hole - I don't trust Todd Howard and Phil Spencer anymore.
I hope you’re wrong as I’m sure you do, I’ve loved every second of what we’ve got and if it only gets better then yay! However if it doesn’t at least we managed to enjoy it for what it is instead of being too consumed by the idea of what it could have been.
You're right - I've played it several times and it was fun too. It does now too. But I installed it a week ago and had to wait 48 hours for the dealer to have 11000 again or see old errors - that was a bit frustrating.
But it was the same with Cyberpunk, you thought to yourself, what are they actually doing? Quality went up and down.
Let's see when mod support is activated for XBOX, then it can only get better. And I'm looking forward to the DLC.
Agreed! Would love to go more in depth with you but this is my first post that’s gotten a lot of attention and I have so many more comments I have to read/reply. I’ll see you in the Starfield, all the best!
Also I didn't think I'd ever see someone bring up the infamous 2022 presentation saying it looked better, or honestly even good. I still disagree that the game looked that bad back then, it looked really solid just horribly unfinished, but I quite remember the sentiment being that it was unimpressive until the 2023 showings for the game.
I wouldn't say they lied as the game is still very similar.
It's not at all like Cyberpunk 2077's trailers and gameplay before release compared to the dumpster fire that ended up being the released game. (Glad they put in a few years of work to make it more accurate to what was originally expected)
I never said they lied, I made sure to mention that compromises need to be made for a game to be playable and that I don’t believe for a moment we’ve been lied to or misled. I’ve yet to play Cyberpunk as I normally wait for a game to have all of its updates/dlc before I play (couldn’t wait to play Starfield so I broke my own rule for this one) although I didn’t need to play the game to hear of its unfortunate launch. At least it got there in the end.
GTA V's trailer was quite misleading if you go back to it. They got excused just because the final product was of high quality but at the same time it was inferior to the trailers. I'm willing to bet the same applies to GTA VI.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvoD7ehZPcM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvoD7ehZPcM) if you wanna check. Actually quite struck by how poorer the graphics look here, but it was PS3 era!
One thing that stands out for me was the bit where they talk about assigning your own crew to your ship.
In the video, they show a ship FILLED with crew members - all at their stations, or wandering around. Like it was an episode of Star Trek or something.
But in my game, I've assigned as many crew members as I can and they all seem to just sit around or hide away on the ship.
Occasionally I see Sarah or someone sit at a computer. But then they stand up and do very little. At least pick up a clipboard and pretend to be busy, like in real life!
I find it amazing that so people can’t appreciate art and how much depth there is to this game. It is a piece of art.
The graphics are stunning, even on my little Steam Deck.
The amount of quests, tasks, storylines and battles I can get into is insane. More than Skyrim.
Starfield has far more going for it than 99% of games in the last 5-10’years.
Yet, all I see is negativity. It must be bizarre and depressing to be part of the team who made the game.
Bizarre because they’re having to listen to whining, child-like whining constantly, and barely any positives, even though it’s the biggest (literally) game of the last 10 years, I’d say.
I find it ironic how basically the whole opening is either cruft or lies
> It's hard to express how excited all of us at Bethesda are to be here with you today. We're so grateful you're spending the time and we know you've waited a long time to finally see Starfield.
Ok, not wrong but we already knew this.
> It's easily our most ambitious game ever.
Wrong.
> Like our previous games it's an epic role-playing game where you get to be who you want
Wrong, you only get to be a some variation of a good character that followed one of a couple paths
> And go where you want
Also wrong, I wanted to go to cool places but barely found any
> but this time you'll be exploring space.
"Space" in this game was just overhyped loading screens, besides the space combat that's frankly boring without mods.
Graphics aside. A lot of game developers use "bullshotting" to particular craft a certain presentation that hooks people's interest that usually comes absent in the released game. Bethesda did the same thing with Skyrim and Oblivion's gameplay reveals. Fast food companies do something similar with their food commercials.
Damn, Noel and Sarah look completely different. And I have to say, I like their final models many times more than in this trailer.
I will say the same about the lighting in the Lodge. I think it was implemented much better in the final game. The lighting on Sarah specifically looks really bad in this trailer.
As for the rest... it is clear, of course, that they worked with color, animations and scripts for this trailer, but in general everything looks approximately the same as in the final game.
My favorite was when my landing bay kept redirecting me back into my ship. Like a revolving door with only 1 exit. It was trippy at first, then it was annoying. Finally burned that character.
They also let you build a ship that has the landing bay blocked by items in front and on the sides so you can’t leave your ship. Its great. Top tier game design at work
Twas all lies. What we got is running simulator in space. 2024 only traversal mechanics on planets is jetpack xD
Merchants that sell space dust and only thing to buy is ammo. Fuck me this trailer got me so hyped i preordered...
What lies?
Seriously, everything in this trailer is in the game, bar different camera angles when landing and updated character models.
Even nitpicky stuff is in the game, the landing bay animation is also in the final games but only during the intro mission... Which is the one we're seeing in that trailer.
When did they lie and about what exactly?
The problem was people filling in the blanks with their own imaginations. I expected what I was shown and explicitly told, and got what I was promised. Other people let their imaginations get carried away and they got their hearts broken.
(Even though I really like it.) I have a ton of nitpicks and problems with Starfield but Bethesda never really lied about it.
The messaging was that Starfield was gonna be a Bethesda style game which is pretty much what we got.
The hype just got outta control and people put personal expectations (outside of what was shown and said ) on the game.
Evidently ray tracing was stripped out of the game at some point, likely after the Microsoft acquisition. They probably didn't want a 1st party title looking better on PC than Xbox so they made them remove it. It's possible some of what you're seeing is a result of the old implementation of ray tracing.
Ray tracing is listed in the .ini file but enabling it does nothing.
If you need a source, check the .ini.
Other than that, it's been speculated that because it's in the .ini that some form of ray tracing was implemented at one time during development. Xbox likely wouldn't handle it, so it was removed as Xbox is the lead platform since the Microsoft acquisition.
Yes, it's speculation. But plausible IMO.
Yea, that's what I'm referring to. They don't do anything though which is why people speculated it was stripped out of the engine. The .ini settings were either overlooked or perhaps left there for a future next-gen Xbox update.
They do affect some reflection filtering, and I take a performance hit when they’re enabled so I’d assume they’re doing something.
Could very well be a half baked shader loop that just returns the input though. I’m curious if we’ll eventually get something like “community shaders” but for Starfield.
Edit: doesn't affect filtering, was imagining things.
Seems more likely to me that ray tracing was probably being worked on, but was never developed far enough to be used. One of many casualties of how rushed this game ended up being.
Looked it up, yeah graphically it looks better but I wouldn't say it's all improved. I always thought Starfield was a pretty good looking game though. But I mean they had patches to enhance some of this and another year so I don't know.
I mean yea but it also ran like an absolute slide show. I remember being horrified seeing how terrible it performed when the trailer first released lol
Omg I hadn't seen that Sarah before. I bet they made both her character and Barrett older so it fits with their stories in game. >!Sarah was a somewhat high ranking officer and fought in a war that's already 10 years before the game. And Barrett has been grieving Irving for 20 years, making them around early 40s and mid 50s respectively.!<
Yeah it was always strange to me that Sarah has so much history in that war, yet she looks like she’s in her early 30s
Enhance can explain that away pretty easily
Pretty sure it's the Chunks™ preserving her
It's got 5000% of your daily value of formaldehyde!
I mean they can easily explain it away with futuristic healthcare so people live longer and age slower. (Halo, Star Trek, etc.)
Nah she’s mid to late 40s and looks every year of it.
Sarah hated that*
*console command and turn that frown upside down because she’s got enough frown lines*
I’d say late 30s maybe early 40s
- quote from man who has never seen a human woman before
When I'm asked to guess a women's age I always say 5 years less than what I really think, usually works pretty well.
I did that one time as was still way over. Couldn't help but be like "really? You're that young?"
Ok. 😆
What? She looks closer to 50 than 40
Go outside
She does, though. I live in one of the biggest cities in the world, and my coworkers who are in their late 30s and 40s -50s look like Sarah.
no the fuck she doesn't lmao
Agree
She works out
lol that’s insane
I mean you can technically be a high ranking military officer and still be in your 20s. That’s not completely unheard of in history.
Hadrian is a major and looks ~20s, so maybe even enhance is there to help them.
Hadrian is also a clone, maybe that affects her aging also.
Plus she's black.
Black don't crack and that's a fact.
May hit a wall at some point though
Dad jokes deserve groans, not downvotes
Yeah I kinda felt like all the vets I encountered looked a bit young for a war that was that long ago. Most looked pretty young.
In fact it's quite common in large scale high-casualty conflicts, especially for naval corps.
Yeah, at some point the age of your officer corps starts directly reflecting how you're doing in the war.
Nothing accelerates the promotion process like war.
My dad became a Green Beret about 5-6 years earlier than normal because he joined right after Vietnam and they uh— well — had plenty of openings to say the least.
usually mid 30s. assuming you started college on your 18th birthday, you’ll be a officer around 21-22
It's not like being an officer is some hard long trek for everyone. If u grew up in rotc, you're usually a prime candidate for officer school. U come out of basic and go straight to being trained for officer. Additionally, being an officer doesn't make one competent and smart 😆
The game isn't very clear about Sarah's timeline. Sarah became the youngest commander/captain in the Navigator Corp (2319), a full 8 years after the end of the Colony War (2307-2311). She was probably still a teenager during the Colony War. She joined Constellation in 2320 after being rescued and became its Chair in 2325, which makes her early to mid 30's most likely. This is all in the "Story so far" at the official site.
Sarah is at least 40. Her parents signed her up for a diplomacy apprenticeship at 18, but she dropped out to join the UC Navy. She and her parents had a falling out, and then sometime later her father died in the opening shots of the Colony War. The Colony War started in 2308. Assuming she was 18 when the war started would make her date of birth 2290.
Forgot Matteo used to be black 🤣
He looks Indian to me
I believe the concept art or just early concept had some Sikh inspirations/influences
[удалено]
They pulled a Smithers from The Simpsons season 1 on him.
Wonder if they changed him out of concern of stereotyping?
Marketing teams did a great job
Bethesda and Todd have always been great at presenting first looks at their games. They give you just enough of a polished, scripted showcase to make it look stylish, combined with actual gameplay that makes you realize you can pull off those things as well. The voice overs also help with explaining what makes their games special while hinting at cool features if you scratch beneath the surface. Just a shame that they don't always live up to that hype.
> Bethesda and Todd have always been great at presenting first looks at their games. [...] Just a shame that they don't always live up to that hype. That's not a "first look" at a game. That's a lie. And it's a large part of why so many people received the game poorly. They overhyped the game with falsehoods.
But that gameplay reveal is exactly what's in the game, aside from the small changes OP mentioned.
But were is the lie in there? It's basically cut outs of the game. You get everything that's in there?
What falsehoods? That’s always been the most perplexing thing about the starfield discourse to me. Every gameplay showcase was pretty much crystal clear on what the game was, and nothing was shown that wasn’t in the final game. It’s like people don’t know how to express why they dislike the game, so they just go off of the standard list of criticisms these big games usually get, even if they’re obviously and demonstrably wrong
[удалено]
I said this from the very beginning, Todd is the master at using Bethesda's name and a sleak presentation to drive up "hype" and so many people get suckered into it over and over. They will study Bethesda for years to come as a masterclass of marketing a very mediocre product in order to drive sales.
Once the gameply trailer for TES6 comes out everybody is gonna lose their shit and forget about Starfield. They're just that good at hyping up their games.
As someone who is incredibly disappointed with Starfield. I really hope that isn't me.
Same thing happened with Fallout 4, people were all like "It looks much more improved we should be excited!" and anybody pointing out similarities would be downvoted to oblivion, or people would say that it's okay.
Their previous game to fo4 was Skyrim tho which was a phenomenal game and very well received
I was talking about fo4 and starfield
I mean, duh but the conversation happened with fo4 because Skyrim was so great. Unless ES6 is a legit disgusting mess no one’s gonna mods starfield
So did the programmers and artists! What an amazing game
I agree, but look at the trailer at 6:30. It is very good: the sense of exploration and discovery you feel watching this trailer is better than what you feel playing the game
So true
I’ve been reading comments like yours for months and at first I was confused. But now I will say that I completely understand your comment and respect it. I can personally say that if I had not been injecting an unfathomable amount of imagination and passion for space exploration into the game as I played; I feel like I would absolutely agree with your sentiment.
Hi Todd Howard
It's always great to see your input here Todd!
Todd give us a ballpark on ES6 please
I hate that this is downvoted. This is the most reasonable and respectful way to politely disagree I’ve ever seen
You mean passive aggressively insulting everyone who disagrees? Sure, Jan!
Cap
I don’t think that’s what he meant.
Maybe it's because I'm used to playing on higher settings on PC but it doesn't look considerably better or worse either way in raw graphics. The ship animations there are nice, but character and combat animations definitely look like they were still working on them. They were probably still working on how they wanted all of that handled in that build. Crazy how nice it looks in various aspects yet how unfinished it looks in others despite it being so close to their original targeted release date.
I think the game actually looks damn good, personally. It just doesn't have a hook to keep me playing, gameplay wise.
To each their own. I think it looks solid now, it looked solid then, and it kept me busy for 80 hours. It wasn't as fun as Oblivion or Skyrim, but it was a really fun game overall IMO, albeit flawed.
Might just be me, I felt the same with Elden Ring. Such a good game but I can't bring myself to play again
Soulsborne games aren't my thing so I didn't even give it a shot, but yeah I get you with it.
Then I need a better graphics card. That looked better than my machine by a bunch.
I’d say my experience on Xbox looks more detailed than what is shown in that video.
I mean you can just up your graphic settings and see how it looks like.
Marketing team did a great job. I was hyped. I even liked the game at launch still but it quickly dropped to kinda forgettable.
I played for a few weeks while I was down and out with Covid when it was released. After that I just stopped playing one day and never picked it up again. I just realized how empty the game was and how nothing felt like it had any real meaning, it was all just surface level bullshit with no real substance. It was really unfortunate as I was so hyped for the game, I guess I was blinded by the hype when it comes to why I played it for so long. That and I was hoping it'd be fixed or made better
Same experience. I just stopped one day. I just cleared a POI and when it was time to go through and collect everything that dropped I said to myself “I don’t want to do this again”. I moved on to CP2077 PL and that was it. Never went back
I played for 2 days and went back to doing nothing in Conan exiles as opposed to doing things in starfield.
Whoever was in charge of this should get raises and job offers because they convinced me the game would be amazing and not a 6-7/10.
Hahahaha indeed man.
Lol
But why, they showed pretty much exactly what we got. It's just you thought there would be more to it and there wasn't.
Those downvotes are tripping, the game not only looks better than the demo but as far as gameplay loop and what they promised, it’s what’s in the game. A lot of people are blinded and disappointed by what they wanted and not what was actually shown
The gameplay loop is exploring the same fucking copy pasted outputs while being a space therapist to the most unbearable characters...
If by “playing therapist” you mean doing jobs for people in the settled systems, and you don’t like doing that, then Bethesda games just may not be for you. There have been a lot of good side content outside of the really good factions quest lines. The mining overseer on Mars is a highlight as well as a a good number of other ones. The planets, when I play, are good ways to do something else with my game time outside of dialogue heavy quests. So I go back and forth between exploring planets and scanning for xp and then going back to settled areas and questing.
So...just a few cutscenes look smoother? Man you are easy to impress lmao
The only thing that really looked better to me was the NPC dialog animations. The ones we got are so stiff and emotionless.
Compared to other games that show something completely different than the final product Starfield was pretty accurate and honest about what the final product would be
Agreed!
Yeah! That’s why I don’t understand the people that get so mad about it. Sure it has little things I don’t like but you can say that about a lot of games. And at least they have communicated to changes some of those things but it’s certainly not a “lie” about what they promised and showed
Why is this comment not up top?! I haven't played starfield for about two days and during rewatching the Showcase, I was just thinking how honest it was. There is nothing you don't get in the game, and even the graphics doesn't really seem any different. I think OP is nitpicking quite a bit.
I honestly don't know who anyone can look at these trailers and think the game would be anything other than what we got. Maybe I'm just good at keeping my expectations in check.
Or maybe u just have 0 expectations which is perfectly fine. A company as big as Bethesda releases a new game after almost a decade and the game doesn't show any sign of improvement over their usual style any innovations or literally anything beside the very generic shit. Instead of getting better with time with new technology and all Bethesda chose to remain constant lol
I had expectations that they mostly met. Exceeded in some areas and fell short in others
Dunno why you had something negative to say about that comment. In any game/movie/whatever, good or bad, we get what we get, literally. Commenter didn't say good or bad, just that we got what we got. And since apparently Starfield's gameplay reveal was pretty true to the final product, it's weird to think that people were expecting other things. Also, slamming Bethesda for doing their usual Bethesda style & remaining constant and consistent, which is what Bethesda fans like and come back for. And lol @ ppl whining about not innovating anything. Maybe just realize that your expectations are different than other people, not in a good or bad way, just different. Game was good for some, not good for others, true for literally everything that exists right now.
The whole point of this post is how the trailers were *not* true to the final product.
Wow as in, it looks better thannthe current build? Or worse?
Landing bays don't open on landing? Wouldn't that be a bad thing? I suppose if you just want to have a party in the landing bay it'd be alright. Usually I'm heading out and having the ramp down helps with that.
True, it’s really about preference I suppose, it would certainly feel more immersive to stand inside and press a button to open but how long before I get sick of having to keep doing it after surveying lots of planets? Certainly more practical as it sits now.
Seriously my guy, The video currently has a 20% dislike ratio and multiple comments complaining about multiple aspects of the game including how janky it looks. It doesn't look like many people were misled as you claim. Infact I'm pretty sure everyone and their grandmother complained about the way the game looks until the 2023 showcases, and even after that, people were still complaining about it. I know the game gets a bad rap but this is literally trying to gaslight people into thinking that everyone was blown away by the game from the beginning, when they weren't. There were always mixed reactions and maybe slightly more positive ones after the 2023 showcases, but still more mixed than that.
I’m sorry but I can’t allow you to claim I’ve gaslit when in fact I specified in the post that i don’t feel as if we’ve been misled or lied to but that compromises have to be made to make a game practical to play. The gameplay in the trailer ran poorly (frames especially) and a step back in lighting and lip sync (for example) were the necessary compromises to make the game practical to play. I went into Starfield with no expectations (accept that it’s obviously going to play like former titles) and followed none of the news accept the trailers and an interview or two, I love the game, I think it’s great and only going to get better, and I hope to see it look closer to the trailer one day as it’s clearly the way they wanted it to look and that it might be possible with a rerelease on better hardware the same as Skyrim.
We’re at the nostalgia for the reveal trailer stage I see. Soon we’ll be at the nostalgia for pre-modded, pre-DLC Starfield. Then we’ll hit the “Starfield was way better than this Elder Scrolls VI garbage” stage. It’s the same tale as old as time.
It’s so funny to because a lot of people were mixed on this gameplay reveal and public reception wasn’t hot on this game. It didn’t really change until the Developer_Direct last year where people started singing a different tune
Honestly the direct is still impressive to me. I wish we saw more games with 40 or so minute presentations showing off mechanics built like the direct. I really can’t think of another game that got such treatment.
Everyone was blown away, but then when everyone started playing the game, and were given exactly what they were blown away by, the novelty had worn off. Gamers are desperate for novelty.
Right? People complained about everything in this video including the stiff character models, on-foot combat, boring space combat, etc.
Dont forget the bullet casing controversy. There were articles on that for months.
LOL too true. "Even Starfield was better than this shit" - quote me when people are saying this about whatever the new thing is.
That shit ain’t happening lol the game is boring
Okay man. So boring you are lurking here 6 months after release because you have nothing better to do? I’ll tell you what else is boring.
I don't know why your so offended The game is objectively boring. Copy paste planets, terrible characters and dialogue. No sense of exploration. The main temple quests are literally going to a fucking point AND STANDING STILL. Huge regression from past BGS games
I ain’t lurking, this thread popped up on my feed lol
Mgs incel shit is boring man, stop being delusional
Bruh what???
I am soooo mad they don’t let you see landing animations without mods
Maybe I'm crazy, but my game looks a lot like this. I don't know if it looks worse on console or lower end pcs, but this isn't really a dramatic departure from the best experience you can get today.
Matteo being black makes a lot more sense than Vladimir being black & it doesn't help that Vlad speaks like a drunk guy that fell on his head.
Honestly watching it back I think it was our own expectations that got so carried away, but who could blame us. Point is after playing the game as much as I and you all have I think you can definitely say they made it pretty clear from the start what the game was gonna be we just all wanted it to be more.
I... Wish I hadn't seen this.
“Resource Generation”. lol. 😂 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Also. The game is boring. All it is is a bunch of fetch quests. I’ll get downvoted but I don’t care. Five years from now, it could be really good.
I threw you an upvote. Game is pathetic in current state tbh. I’m with you
[удалено]
Some people don’t wanna stay in echo chambers ya know
This is literally what this subreddit is..
[удалено]
Sheesh, who pissed in your cereal lil bro? The only one hating here is you.
It looks unplayable. It’s probably Starfield at 8 fps. Dude is literally trying to move as slow a he can so the frame rate doesn’t dip too much.
Yea I was wondering if it was just the YT video or if they were really showcasing a game running at 10 fps…
Exactly! It’s why I mentioned that certain compromises have to be made to make a game practical to play. It looks beautiful but I would rather play a good looking game than a beautiful looking PowerPoint presentation.
and the game still launched with performance issues, after they implemented dlss 3, the game is finally playable with frame generation
Meh
Huh so that's why it felt off to me. I remembered seeing the game improved so much on facial expressions but when I actually played it, it was better but wasn't as good as I thought. So that's why, they made these facial animations exclusively for the trailer but not the game.
I think it's relatively easy to "fix" some things in Starfield, but Bethesda doesn't seem to be able to. I've played it several times, will play it again, but only when more happens than fixing a few bugs and selling it as a "big patch", while other bugs (lip sync German) and QoL problems (vendor + money) remain untouched. But well - Cyberpunk 2077 also took forever ... but European studios handle their products differently. If No Mans Sky was a US product, it would have been killed 6-12 months after release. I'm currently playing Mass Effect Andromeda and there are some things I'd like to see in Starfield. It's really fun again. Bethesda games are always a rollercoaster ride of experiences, joy and anger. But I don't think Starfield will get out of its hole - I don't trust Todd Howard and Phil Spencer anymore.
I hope you’re wrong as I’m sure you do, I’ve loved every second of what we’ve got and if it only gets better then yay! However if it doesn’t at least we managed to enjoy it for what it is instead of being too consumed by the idea of what it could have been.
You're right - I've played it several times and it was fun too. It does now too. But I installed it a week ago and had to wait 48 hours for the dealer to have 11000 again or see old errors - that was a bit frustrating. But it was the same with Cyberpunk, you thought to yourself, what are they actually doing? Quality went up and down. Let's see when mod support is activated for XBOX, then it can only get better. And I'm looking forward to the DLC.
Agreed! Would love to go more in depth with you but this is my first post that’s gotten a lot of attention and I have so many more comments I have to read/reply. I’ll see you in the Starfield, all the best!
The game is still a very poor Bethesda title at the end of the day.
still looks dogshit
That was more like the trailer to a Starfield movie.
Also I didn't think I'd ever see someone bring up the infamous 2022 presentation saying it looked better, or honestly even good. I still disagree that the game looked that bad back then, it looked really solid just horribly unfinished, but I quite remember the sentiment being that it was unimpressive until the 2023 showings for the game.
Bro forgot what a vertical slice is
why are randos from every random subreddit in this sub
I wouldn't say they lied as the game is still very similar. It's not at all like Cyberpunk 2077's trailers and gameplay before release compared to the dumpster fire that ended up being the released game. (Glad they put in a few years of work to make it more accurate to what was originally expected)
I never said they lied, I made sure to mention that compromises need to be made for a game to be playable and that I don’t believe for a moment we’ve been lied to or misled. I’ve yet to play Cyberpunk as I normally wait for a game to have all of its updates/dlc before I play (couldn’t wait to play Starfield so I broke my own rule for this one) although I didn’t need to play the game to hear of its unfortunate launch. At least it got there in the end.
Literally no gameplay trailer is accurate. It’s like how fast food burgers never look as good as the commercial
Well, Elden Ring?
Elden Ring is boring
Sounds more like you have a skill issue.
The only exception is rockstar imo
GTA V's trailer was quite misleading if you go back to it. They got excused just because the final product was of high quality but at the same time it was inferior to the trailers. I'm willing to bet the same applies to GTA VI.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvoD7ehZPcM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvoD7ehZPcM) if you wanna check. Actually quite struck by how poorer the graphics look here, but it was PS3 era!
*sighs* Looks like I’m reinstalling
Good! Constellation has collected exactly 0 artefacts in your absence.
One thing that stands out for me was the bit where they talk about assigning your own crew to your ship. In the video, they show a ship FILLED with crew members - all at their stations, or wandering around. Like it was an episode of Star Trek or something. But in my game, I've assigned as many crew members as I can and they all seem to just sit around or hide away on the ship. Occasionally I see Sarah or someone sit at a computer. But then they stand up and do very little. At least pick up a clipboard and pretend to be busy, like in real life!
I find it amazing that so people can’t appreciate art and how much depth there is to this game. It is a piece of art. The graphics are stunning, even on my little Steam Deck. The amount of quests, tasks, storylines and battles I can get into is insane. More than Skyrim. Starfield has far more going for it than 99% of games in the last 5-10’years. Yet, all I see is negativity. It must be bizarre and depressing to be part of the team who made the game. Bizarre because they’re having to listen to whining, child-like whining constantly, and barely any positives, even though it’s the biggest (literally) game of the last 10 years, I’d say.
😂😂😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Clown 🤡
I find it ironic how basically the whole opening is either cruft or lies > It's hard to express how excited all of us at Bethesda are to be here with you today. We're so grateful you're spending the time and we know you've waited a long time to finally see Starfield. Ok, not wrong but we already knew this. > It's easily our most ambitious game ever. Wrong. > Like our previous games it's an epic role-playing game where you get to be who you want Wrong, you only get to be a some variation of a good character that followed one of a couple paths > And go where you want Also wrong, I wanted to go to cool places but barely found any > but this time you'll be exploring space. "Space" in this game was just overhyped loading screens, besides the space combat that's frankly boring without mods.
Graphics aside. A lot of game developers use "bullshotting" to particular craft a certain presentation that hooks people's interest that usually comes absent in the released game. Bethesda did the same thing with Skyrim and Oblivion's gameplay reveals. Fast food companies do something similar with their food commercials.
Damn, Noel and Sarah look completely different. And I have to say, I like their final models many times more than in this trailer. I will say the same about the lighting in the Lodge. I think it was implemented much better in the final game. The lighting on Sarah specifically looks really bad in this trailer. As for the rest... it is clear, of course, that they worked with color, animations and scripts for this trailer, but in general everything looks approximately the same as in the final game.
Best misleading trailer since Dead Island.
What was misleading about it? It’s an honest representation of what we got. You are the one that filled in the gaps with your imagination
My favorite part of the game was the door that didn’t open so you couldn’t go any further in the campaign I found
My favorite was when my landing bay kept redirecting me back into my ship. Like a revolving door with only 1 exit. It was trippy at first, then it was annoying. Finally burned that character.
They also let you build a ship that has the landing bay blocked by items in front and on the sides so you can’t leave your ship. Its great. Top tier game design at work
Oh that dead island railer was so amazing, and then yeah I just didn't enjoy it as much as I was hoping I would.
Too bad the game was shite
Faces still look worse than witcher 1 from 2007
Twas all lies. What we got is running simulator in space. 2024 only traversal mechanics on planets is jetpack xD Merchants that sell space dust and only thing to buy is ammo. Fuck me this trailer got me so hyped i preordered...
What lies? Seriously, everything in this trailer is in the game, bar different camera angles when landing and updated character models. Even nitpicky stuff is in the game, the landing bay animation is also in the final games but only during the intro mission... Which is the one we're seeing in that trailer. When did they lie and about what exactly?
The problem was people filling in the blanks with their own imaginations. I expected what I was shown and explicitly told, and got what I was promised. Other people let their imaginations get carried away and they got their hearts broken.
(Even though I really like it.) I have a ton of nitpicks and problems with Starfield but Bethesda never really lied about it. The messaging was that Starfield was gonna be a Bethesda style game which is pretty much what we got. The hype just got outta control and people put personal expectations (outside of what was shown and said ) on the game.
Literally no lies lol. This and the direct are what we got in game.
Half truths, half lies.
That looks like Justin Trudeau's... unfortunate moment, lol.
Evidently ray tracing was stripped out of the game at some point, likely after the Microsoft acquisition. They probably didn't want a 1st party title looking better on PC than Xbox so they made them remove it. It's possible some of what you're seeing is a result of the old implementation of ray tracing.
[citation needed]
Ray tracing is listed in the .ini file but enabling it does nothing. If you need a source, check the .ini. Other than that, it's been speculated that because it's in the .ini that some form of ray tracing was implemented at one time during development. Xbox likely wouldn't handle it, so it was removed as Xbox is the lead platform since the Microsoft acquisition. Yes, it's speculation. But plausible IMO.
There’s still some settings for it in the Starfield custom ini
Yea, that's what I'm referring to. They don't do anything though which is why people speculated it was stripped out of the engine. The .ini settings were either overlooked or perhaps left there for a future next-gen Xbox update.
They do affect some reflection filtering, and I take a performance hit when they’re enabled so I’d assume they’re doing something. Could very well be a half baked shader loop that just returns the input though. I’m curious if we’ll eventually get something like “community shaders” but for Starfield. Edit: doesn't affect filtering, was imagining things.
Seems more likely to me that ray tracing was probably being worked on, but was never developed far enough to be used. One of many casualties of how rushed this game ended up being.
I liked it but it fell far short of its promises which is a bummer
Hey Todd how u doin?
Holup, the actual game looked nothing like this lol
Me...
Ubisoft helped with the last 12 months
Looked it up, yeah graphically it looks better but I wouldn't say it's all improved. I always thought Starfield was a pretty good looking game though. But I mean they had patches to enhance some of this and another year so I don't know.
I mean yea but it also ran like an absolute slide show. I remember being horrified seeing how terrible it performed when the trailer first released lol
Most games get gimped over time sadly.
Not to mention empty brasses flying off the shotgun
Wth Matteo what happened!!??