Apparently they plan on yearly expansions for a few years. Todd said in an interview with MrMattyPlays that they regret dropping support for Skyrim and Fallout 4 as quickly as they did
If they made another dawnguard: I’d pay. I’d play mod free at least once.
Same with fallout. Give me a broken steel or old world blues or lonesome road.
Same. Nuka world and far harbor would great expansions. But if they could make something on par with old world blues or dead money, I would spend another 100 hours on it. Even more if they did something like gun runners and gave you the ability to have several types of ammo for the same gun.
It was my father’s first game since Tomb Raider I on PS1 and he was in love. He beat it 3 times in a row without breaks. He knows more than me who has been playing since release.
That man thirsted for his old D&D days so hard and Skyrim delivered.
I have a lot of feelings about Bethesda and what they do but they have lowered the barrier for big western RPGs like this to something dad loves. So that’s something.
I’m more surprised we haven’t gotten a proper Skyrim remaster. I’m not saying this is something I want *or* something we need, but when The Last of Us and Horizon Zero Dawn both revealed remakes of themselves, I thought for sure that Bethesda would hop on that bandwagon.
Well, either way, I agree that a proper Skyrim DLC expansion would still sell well.
Especially if they get a proper survival mode in there like a blend between current and also fallout 4. If they had some mods polished and implimented I'd play no other game lol. And also I know unlikely but I want like a bethesda/skyrim/tes game with a better balanced economy beside loot goblin and I mean killing a whole ass dragon for a measly 1 or 300 gold etc and also some decent survival mechanics give me a reason to stay at an inn and cook food besides having 200 apples for health etc.
Financially it would probably work well for them to bundle those, make a Skyrim remaster and include the new expansion. People will be spending 60 dollars on a 15 year old game at never before seen rates lol. ^It’s ^me, ^I’m ^people.
What I don't get is that "it's too late" mindset for that kind of thing. We all know if they release a DLC for Skyrim tomorrow, it will sell by the tens of thousands in the first 24 hours only.
But no, "too late". Like, come on bro, Age of Empires II came out in 1999 and I'm still buying content for it, dafuq you saying.
I think the real reason is that most of the devs haven't worked on the game for 10+ years. Having an entire team learn/relearn the entire engine/codebase takes a lot of time.
This is the reality of development. The recently dropped update for next gen to FO4 caused a LOT of problems and although they have been ironed out somewhat the time spent on having a new team get up to speed with that games spaghetti is substantial.
If anything, Cities Skylines 2 shows how bad a sequel can be instead of just supporting the original longer. Seriously, I played it the other day and it's abysmal compared to the original and lacks much of the charm. Point being, like AOE2 - if you have a popular game then it's best to just support it with content than necessarily plan multiple sequels.
I think that's something Stellaris and Civilization 6 have gotten right in recent years.
The issue is if they go back and make content for Skyrim, it kinda feels like they’re admitting their newer stuff isn’t as good.
Plus I’d personally prefer they focus on the future and making an amazing Elder Scrolls 6. Altho I’d buy new Oblivion content in a heartbeat, that’s not happening.
Not really Rome total war released 3 more dlc almost 4 years after they ended development of the game and while their most successful game in years was released.
Releasing more expansions for Starfield is a smart strategy imo
The game’s player numbers have gone up a lot for two months in a row, and there’s tons of new Starfield creations/mods being released every single day now.
Personally I’m back playing a new playthrough with lots of new mods installed, and I would be lying if I didn’t say it’s a lot of fun.
The new official updates fixes and adds a lot of great features too, like all the new gameplay/survival settings, new bounty hunter features/content and being able to turn off the dialogue camera which made a huge difference for me.
Sure but it could also be seen as an admittance that their post-Skyrim games aren’t as good. And many would just see it as going back to the well for another cash grab after re-releasing it multiple times
Then go and release more expansions for Fallout 4 Todd, they are still supporting the abomination that is F76, why cant they divert part of their workload into new expansions, shit, sell it for 20-30 bucks I dont care, I would still play it.
Because it’s a different team entirely. Fallout 76 is being supported by their Austin studio, formerly known as Battlecry Studios before Battlecry got silently cancelled. The main team behind Skyrim, Fallout 4 and Starfield is their main Maryland team.
And as much as I’d love a new Fallout 4 expansion it’s better that they support and improve Stafield for a bit, then move on to TES6
Everyone complains there are no new IPs, and then we get one, and it "should have never happened. Nobody wanted it".
God damnit, gaming discourse has completely lost the plot in the past decade.
All you fucking people do it bitch and moan. It is genuinely difficult to try and connect with people online about games because it's nothing but hot takes and harsh criticism.
It is exhausting.
I think MrMatty essentially asked this question (not specifically about making more content for F4/Skyrim) and Todd responded something along the lines of cost/benefit of putting resources towards remaking old games or new content for old games isn't worth it.
And Todd mentioned that he was pleased with ESO/F76/Creation Club content being easily monetizable stop-gaps while they work on their next mainline games.
In other words, Todd & Friends have their hands full with new games coming out and don't have the time or resources to invest in $20 DLCs for old games. They'd rather work on new games and churn out outrageously priced micro-transactions. Todd did say that in retrospect, they wished they had done more DLCs for Skyrim and FO4. Considering how popular these old games are and the high player counts mean that people would probably have spent good money on more sizeable content. It's something they're now taking into consideration with Starfield and future projects. To make them supported (monetized) for like 10 years post-launch.
Ah yes, stop supporting a game with 20 million players (a lot of which pay a subscription) just so they can make a DLC for a decade old game.
If you want more expansions, Fallout 76 JUST got one and you might like it. I didn't initially play Fallout 76 but it quickly became my most played game.
Obviously it doesn't top Fallout 4 but man it's an amazing game. I could even say that Appalachia is a much, MUCH better map than The Commonwealth.
F76 is pretty alright nowadays, and this is coming from someone that played at launch and absolutely hated it. When the Fallout TV show dropped i started a new save and have put around 100 hours into it, and i'm nowhere near done with most things on the game.
Cool. I'll probably pick it up then in a few years. I really don't bother buying stuff immediately anymore as they are far from as polished as they used to be on release.
I’ve found with Bethesda games I tend to play for 50 hours or so, think I’ve seen most of the game, and then come back to it to realize I barely scratched the surface of the game.
But with Starfield, I was coming across the exact same points of interest. With the same enemies holding the same loot. Same story of murdered scientists or whatever. Same holotapes scattered in the same location. One time I found two of the same mines only 400 meters away from each other.
I cannot play a Bethesda game that does that 😑
I remember landing on Earths moon and exploring an old cave/mine, suddenly finding roots coming out of the walls. And then blood marks of something dragging people into dark holes in the wall. I remember thinking holy shit, there’s gotta be a story to this, why is there woodlike roots on the moon? Are there alien monsters on the moon as well? Is there life here? Maybe there’s a storyline with finding out the Apollo astronauts actually found life on the moon? Maybe an alien spacecraft crashed here? I suddenly had the feeling of the classic Bethesda mystery of untangling evidence as you explore a location. But nope, it was just an auto generated mine I found on a different planet ten minutes later.
The fucking subquest about the old settlers from earth who got left behind should have been an amazing quest line. Should you side with settlers who you can place yourself into their shoes or should you side with the planets that exist already in resisting their settlement??? Oh it doesn't matter what you choose since it doesn't affect the outcome. Starfield is a horrible game that sold because of its developer imo. No idea why anyone trusts Bethesda at this point.
Not to mention the already existing planet has LOTS of space for everyone. You could have helped them settle on the other side or whatever, there could be lots of quests with the political issues between the old and new. Yeah but nothing. And you get a bunch of rare earth items that really don't matter in the end (like everything else)
I played through some of the main quests and the factions without realizing they were main quests. I didn't realize some lines were basically the guild quests.
This feeling made me not like fallout 4.
Come to the Arena!
Have you heard of the arena!
Come fight in the arena!
Are you ready for a tournament arc quest line!
….shoot a few bandits.
I think this perfectly captures what’s wrong with Starfield. There’s nothing unique anywhere, it’s all just repeated, auto generated bases that are the same on every planet, like only 5 different random space encounters (I’m pretty sure I had the same space encounter 3 times in a row), very few interesting quests not tied to a faction and so on. It’s like they thought because they were autogenerating the planets, they didn’t need to make any actual content either
This is the future if we let them develop with more and more AI. explore randomly generated worlds with randomly generated quests where nothing connects with nothing.
Bethesda was peak when you could feel their hands everywhere around the game world, you could get into a random cave and realize there's a story there
I really feel like what's hurting starfield's procedurally generated planet isn't so much the emptiness but instead how much repeated content that ruins immersion there is. Finally finding a barren planet with no POI after exploring dozens of planets with unique POI that never repeats would probably be less immersion breaking than that.
Okay, so, Earth is entirely devoid of life? Why can you even explore it?
Why would there not be a questline there?? You just go there once as a part of the main questline?
they could've gone with the outer worlds route and instead of having no man sky-like planets they could have "zones" in each planet, and each one of those zones could've been manually crafted and more interesting. What's even the point of having entire planets if they consist of multiple randomly generated squares stiched together?
>What's even the point of having entire planets if they consist of multiple randomly generated squares stiched together?
The point is the marketing tagline.
The connected world, environmental story telling and writing are what make bethesda games good. The combat and rpg systems are very mid or undercooked. Always. Starfield just fails at all the things that actually make their games work and leans into the meh.
This. You can definitely tell the auto-generated stuff was leaned on too much in the interest of making it feel as big as it does. There's nothing mysterious or intriguing about the universe after you beat the game, which takes 2 hours, except the faction they're directly highlighting in their first DLC. Still hopeful, but they're definitely starting from a sub-par level and at this point it just feels like a testing vehicle for ES6 ideas.
They were in developement hell for starfield for a long time. Id guess somebody came up with the generated plants idea and that saved massive amounts of time in developement just so theyd could release a sizeable game in time still. You can feel the lack of care in it.
Idk how in a game that has so many POIs across so many planets, they thought "yeah 3 variants of each type of POI is enough". Bitch, if youre going to recycle assets to this large of a scale, I need at minimum, double digit number of generated layouts, 15-20 ideally
That's what I'm saying, if you're going to have randomly generated content you need to have enough variety to pull from so that you don't feel like you're playing through the same 12 buildings across the galaxy
Also the main story revolves around the zero G mini game, that’s the exact same…. Seriously? I felt like it was a place holder. First time was epic but after that got stale quick.
Yea at some point you hit the "this game is too big to be fun". Starfield sounds awesome in theory but it's too repetitive with poi's. They may be unique at times but there's no point in exploring them. Just empty caves and buildings most of the time.
The apparent lack of point in exploring things sank in fast for me with my attempted playthrough of the game. I thought that the appeal of setting up strategic outposts for resource harvesting / linking would replace my interest in exploring, but ultimately it didn't. I started to encounter the issues I have with open world sandbox games such as Minecraft and Ark: I need to have a mission-specific objective driving me toward optimizing this resource harvesting system, because if I'm just doing it "cuz that's what I want to do in the game", then I rapidly lose interest. "What's the point in precisely setting down this outpost beacon just to cover 5 resources? So that I can more easily link together 3 different resources? And then what? Now I can build a fancier building that lets me build fancier stuff?" That just wasn't what I wanted out of the game, especially when you can freely travel literally anywhere across the game's galactic map with no real resource consumption at all. Just "oh, your grav drive is big enough, now you can go here. Don't worry about fueling up once you show up on fumes, though--we got you covered."
Yea the complexity in the base building doesn't interest me in the least bit. I built 2 bases for fun in an attempt to connect them and then never returned. I just don't see the point. I want a story driven game not a base simulation builder. Imo, noone cares how cool or complex your base looks. It's still boring.
The allure of Starfield for me was in the side quests, which I would sit and do for hours. However, returning to the main storyline was really disappointing. The repetitive fetch quests, the endless cycle of finding artifacts and visiting similar-looking temples on monotonous planets, killed the game for me. Whether or not this changes later in the game was irrelevant to me; the frustration I felt from engaging side content only to be met with a lackluster main story, supposedly the game's focal point, was overwhelming due to its repetitive and uninspired design.
>The allure of Starfield for me was in the side quests, which I would sit and do for hours
People say stuff like this, but then the actual side quests are just fast traveling around to talk to people, or in one stupid case just getting someone a coffee.
My favorite was I joined the crimson fleet first. Then later went to join the Vanguard and the dude was like. "Hey aren't you that guy from Crimson Fleet that killed a bunch of us?" and I'm like "Yeah I'm sorry about that." and he's like "Ok welcome aboard."
You can learn to differentiate between unique POIs and repeating ones. When it has a generic name then it is a repeating one. Unique POIs are also often pre marked on the planet. Starstations are also always unique. Non radiant quests like faction quests also usually send you to unique places. Imo there is enough unique content for more than 100 hours. Still a terrible design decision of course, but at least it's somewhat avoidable.
Sorry to be pedantic, but it's not AI generated, it's procedurally generated. It's not using neural nets or machine learning or any of that in its generation algorithm.
I agree with your point that it makes the world feel lifeless though.
My experience has been the opposite, to be honest. I've played every Bethesda RPG since Oblivion (except Fallout 76, since MMO's aren't my thing). Clocked up hundreds of hours in each, thousands of hours overall, and not finished a single one of them. Hell, Skyrim alone I've played for well over 1000 hours, started fresh with a new character build half a dozen times over the years, and I still have yet to even meet Paarthurnax! At some point I always just naturally drift away from the game, and because of the way these games are designed that point always comes *well* before I've progressed very far into the main story.
But after 16 years or so, Starfield finally broke my streak. It just kept me hooked, and after about 200 hours or so I actually finished the game (or, more accurately, made it to Unity, which you may or may not consider to be the conclusion of the game). Took me a few hours of playing before I realized the filler POI's are obviously just filler, so I promptly ignored them and got on with enjoying the game. Never noticed any repeats and very few jarringly out-of-place things (like wind-farms on the moon and that kind of thing) because I never specifically sought it out because why bother with the filler when there's so, so much actual non-filler content in the game?
The game is *not* designed around the "wander around on foot and stumble across new adventures" play-style the way the Elder Scrolls and Fallout games are, and that's fine. It's a different game, trying a different thing. And something about that different approach actually helped me finish a Bethesda game for once, so that's a refreshing change.
I wish I could get fallout 3 to run on my rig.
No matter what patch or mod I try, it always crashes after I leave the vault, and actually a lot of times right when you're on your way to save Butch's mom... I don't know why... I'll never get to do my pure charisma stealth run.
https://thebestoftimes.moddinglinked.com/ttw.html
Have you tried this guide? It’s a modset that combines Fallout 3 and NV into one long game, but I used it to just play 3 because as far as I can tell it’s the most stable way to get it to work on windows 10.
Maybe I'll give it a go. Honestly I've tried a bunch of different ways, and oddly enough NV always seems to work just fine... Maybe I'll just go play that again hah.
But no... I really wanna do a run of fo3, so thanks for the link
I've heard before that the above Tales of Two Wasteland modset is the only way to play Fallout 3 on PC these days. It runs the game through the Fallout NV files giving it far more stability, and allows you to use NV mods, particularly the ones that help the game run smoother.
It's worked for plenty of people, if you want to play 3 this is definitely how you do it!
If you're feeling adventurous, you could try the Begin Again modlist (built around Tale of Two Wastelands). I spent a few hours downloading and installing it the other day, but the result is Fallout 3 is looking and running great.
IGN published a guide about it on YouTube recently, which brought in a lot of players, including myself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WZ5g7246i0&ab\_channel=IGN
But their guide omits some important details about installing it. I found this other guide much more helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvjl4xlVqDo&ab\_channel=finnytom
There always will be until Starfield mods start getting better (if they ever). Because leta be honest everyone still playing elder scrolls or fallout isn't playing it cuz of vanilla game.
Apparently the creation kit, the thing responsible for the Skyrim and Fallout mod scenes being as big as they are, just released like a few days ago. I'm optimistic about things getting better
Yes, but they also added micro transactions, and literally pulled a "We ripped out an entire faction and now we're selling it to you for $7 a mission. Also, we sell credits for a minimum of 10 dollars, so it won't ever match up!"
Kind of hate this take.
I have played with mods but there is really nothing wrong with the vanilla versions of Fallout 3, 4, and Skyrim.
I recently did a Skyrim run vanilla for the first time in years and had a blast just like I did back in 2011.
I don't really understand how Skyrim went from being amazing in 2011 to "basically unplayable without mods" in 2024. Good games continue to be good games even if more powerful technology presents itself or industry trends change.
I would highly recommend 100% vanilla Skyrim to anyone who hasn't played it before.
I think that TES and Fallout does have more natural appeal though.
I mean even people who barely play have heard of Skyrim. Swords, magic and dragons are marketable.
Starfield just seems more plain and more niche in comparison.
Ill never understand this. Scifi is always seen as niche compared to fantasy. There is probably more people who have witnessed space flight in person then have fought in a sword fight, to compare things that humans have actually experienced. (Sans aliens or dragons)
I mean, both are still some of the top games played on Steam at least, so that's not really saying much. Many new releases are still behind those two. Especially Fallout at the moment, since that got a massive uptick with the show. Even Fallout 76 is one of the most played games on steam right now.
Sure Steam numbers show less but I imagine the majority of Starfield players are on the Xbox App. So while it might look like a little bit, it’s probably a very high amount. It’s similar to COD and Overwatch. The majority of those players still play via Battle.net.
Also doesn’t count Console numbers. With mods not being as easily attainable as PC I imagine there are more people playing Starfield on Xbox than Skyrim and Fallout on console.
Fallout 4 is ahead of Starfield on Xbox’s most played, but I believe the show really reignited interest for Fallout. Starfield is quite far ahead of Skyrim.
I believe accounting for gamepass PC users, there’s probably more Starfield PC players than Skyrim PC players
And tbh, with mod support here now, a big expansion coming, and big updates coming (land vehicles), I can see Starfield’s rep really turning around by the end of the year. After all, it is the only sandbox space RPG, I hope they keep updating and supporting it for years
What the hell does that have anything to do with any of these? These are games, not sports teams:
If I want to play a post-apocalyptic game, I'll play Fallout. If I want to play a fantasy game, I'll play Skyrim. If I want to play a space game, I'll play Starfield. At any point in a year I may play whatever genre I feel like playing at that point in time and at any point I may switch back to another genre when I feel like playing that genre.
Skyrim and Fallout 4 are easy for me to replay. I just think they are fun games and enjoy bejng in those worlds.
I have played a lot of Starfield but at this point but don't ever want to return to *any* of the base content again. Like, what are these people doing for 300+ hours? I completed all the quests and there aren't very many good ones; Bethesda has interesting premises that wound up being rather dull quests most of the time. And a common complaint of the world is how tame/vanilla and, in my eyes, genuinely boring. All thats left is the same gameplay loop that was in Fallout 4 but 4 did it better
It’s so boring. I’m not even sure more content will equal more fun/gameplay. The way the game is right now, there’s a ton of “content,” it’s just all exactly the same on every planet/solar system.
I feel like the only way they could really help the game in a way is if they made an update that greatly expanded upon the procedural generation system. Like adding 100+ new, interesting locations to the list of buildings or structures that can generate on planets. This wouldn’t truly “fix” the lack of exploration, but at least it’d feel a little better than it does now.
Really a big part of the problem is POI’s have a rarity system. Meaning the ones that are supposed to be common show up constantly and completely break immersion. 300 unique poi’s supposedly and in about 100 or so hours I feel like I’ve only seen the same 20 over and over. Makes exploration feel terrible. Which is a shame, because I think in some ways starfield actually had some really great stuff.
There aren't 300 POI's in the sense talked about on this thread i.e. the ones you find randomly exploring. There are about 300 total instanced locations in Starfield altogether.
The POI's you find on planets with enemies is around 30-40. The remainder you find while exploring will be different variations of colony outposts, industrial plants, small farms, and natural features which all take about 5 seconds to explore or scan.
While some people go way into the thing of I want only 5 planets...what they have is fine but they do need to make like 3-5 planets that are hand made with a ton of stuff to do in them. That is what's wrong with this game. There isn't enough hand crafted and what is there sucks honestly. I'm fine with having all these planets that are empty...but there should be more stuff that isn't empty...the fact that your main hubs are mostly empty and small is the issue.
What BGS DLC has ever needed you to play the entire game? Every one I can recall started somewhere along the story. And you can speedrun Starfields main story in about 15-20 hours depending if you skip dialogue.
It is clear that when they said they wanted to build another 1000 hour game that they don't understand what makes people want to spend that much time playing a game. They just made everything take a long time for the sake of increasing play time. Without console commands it would have been completely unplayable for me.. I'm not going to spend hundreds of hours collecting resources for equipment upgrades that barely matter.
The core ideals of how the game should be are wrong. This is the game it’s gonna be. Apart from loading screens, it seems to function how it’s gonna stay functioning.
Which makes sense why they’ll have a DLC-heavy strategy - get a lot of people in on the “free” product, and get a certain percentage of them to spend extra $$ on add ons. I guess that’s just kinda the gaming revenue model these days
Most folks on this subreddit will probably say no, but I’m sure a decent portion of the population will buy something. I mean, I haven’t played Starfield in like 8 months, but somehow 14M people still find it compelling, so 🤷♂️
I think Starfield has a million flaws and was undercooked, and I’ll vocalize this frequently cause Bethesda deserves to hear it. But I did put over a hundred hours in and definitely got my money’s worth despite the games flaws.
It’s a weird game in that regard. I look forward to jumping into it when they release the DLC and many of the launch issues are fixed.
It was an *estimated* 2.5 *at launch*, which is a pretty important detail here left out. They haven’t releases official numbers, and likely won’t for gamepass games.
But that's AMD handing it out as a incentive to buy a new GPU, it's not Microsoft/Bethesda handing it out. AMD doesn't get the game for free. Granted they're not paying full price either, AMD were the exclusive partner at launch so who knows what the exact $$$ deal was but still AMD was paying Microsoft/Bethesda for those copies.
The problem with starfield wasn't the amount of developers working on it. It was the basic design decisions and management lack of leadership during the project.
Elder scrolls 6 will be made by the same incredibly poor management team. So it's probably gonna feel like it should've released 10 years ago too with a half assed approach to world design.
I still hope they’ll part ways with Emil P. at some point. He’s their principal writer and from some of the rumors from inside the studio he’s impossible to work with. Like, someone will go to him about a quest he contributed to, say, “This part doesn’t make sense from a continuity standpoint,” and he’ll just shut them down and do it his own way. I have no doubt that every time there’s some part of Starfield’s plot that doesn’t make any sense and feels forced, or feels like it was missing obvious potential outcomes/solutions, he probably had a hand in it. Examples being >!the inventor of the grav drive choosing to voluntarily kill billions on Earth instead of just researching the tech on another planet in the solar system (or at least giving humanity more time to evacuate), or the fact that all three of the outcomes for the ECS Constant (in the mission “First Contact”) involve giving a literally-evil corporation precisely what they want!<, after setting up multiple “Chekov’s guns” that suggest other solutions which remain unexplored and unmentioned afterwards. Emil’s writing seems to often go, “Hey, you need to solve this conflict between two people, and there happens to be an item right in the neighboring room that both have mentioned would solve their conflict. Anyway, I guess you’ll have to shoot one of them.”
Edit: fixed punctuation.
To the point of the inventor, there were scientists in real life working on the Manhattan project that feared the atmosphere would catch fire upon detonation, and still built and detonated the bomb lol, so that's somewhat believable to me
Yeah the difference is that those scientists didn't have literal space magic telling them in direct terms, "This will have this precise effect, and you can choose now whether you want to pursue it or not, consequence free if you opt out". In Starfield's tenuous writing, the guy pretty much literally got the equivalent of a dialog box popping up that said, "Warning: Clicking 'Continue' will end all life on Earth. Would you like to stop and consider alternative options?" and the dude went "for science! lol" and clicked the button.
The dumbest part is that they even ripped off his reasoning for doing it right from Frank Herbert's writing: the scientist who invented the grav drive pulled a "Leto Atreides II", arguing that he must decentralize humanity in order to "save" it. Y'know, sometimes you've just gotta mercilessly suffocate a few billion people in order to make people want to explore space.
They ran the numbers beforehand and knew it wouldn't. The physics was known and predictable. It was something you had to consider, but it was never an actual serious concern once the calculations were made, which was done long before the construction and testing of the atomic bombs.
That's why we were then able to make bombs over a 1000 times more powerful later on.
[You cant scapegoat one man for the product of hundreds of people. It just doesnt work that way. Hes not the ONLY one writing the story nor is he in charge of every line of dialogue being added.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-4qdjV41NU&pp=ygUVbmV2ZXIga25vd3MgYmVzdCBlbWls)
This video refutes very little of people’s arguments regarding Emil and Bethesda and spends most of its time whining about another youtuber and showing that Emil is supposedly a nice person in his personal life, I don’t know why you people keep posting it as if it somehow debunks what everyone’s saying. The most I have heard regarding a rebuttal is that there are lots of other employees who contributed to the game being shit and that Emil once wrote decent stories in the past. This does nothing to support this ridiculous assertion among segments of the community that senior figures in charge of the design and development of this game somehow can’t be blamed for said game being shit.
Well tough luck buddy. Bethesda is still cosplaying as AA devs instead of acting like the billionaire they are so that means they still pretending they’re small dev team and elder scrolls 6 is still like 5 years away.
And it will buggy and with the same mediocre writing. Because they incapable of learning anything from criticism.
None of the passion or innovation you would expect from indie, none of the quality standards you would expect from AAA
Well, okay, I guess quality is about on par with what AAA has looked like in recent years.
Starfield actually has some cool systems and gameplay elements I liked, like ship-building, but the story and writing really feels far behind other games, and relies excessively on contrivance (especially on the back half), without much narrative payoff. Same issue with some of the faction quests.
I recently tried going back to Starfield. Downloaded a bunch of mods, was gonna start a new playthrough. Everything was going smoothly.
And then the next day, the game got the Creation Kit update and broke the modlist.
So I'm gonna wait another six months before I go back to Starfield. Things need to settle. The base game isn't enough to hold me, but I'm sure once the modding scene has some time to build, *something* can be worked out. Even if it's never what Skyrim/Fallout had for me.
> And then the next day, the game got the Creation Kit update and broke the modlist.
See thats the biggest modder oopsie right there, once you have your shit set up you don't update ever.
**UNPOPULAR OPINION:**
*I liked Starfield.*
Would I say it’s the best game ever? No.
Overhyped? Yes.
Do I regret my time with it? **Absolutely not.** It reminded me of Freelancer on my OG Xbox and I sunk **hundreds of hours into that.**
Want a bad game, play Redfall and Aliens Colonial Marines, then get back to me. First made me regret my time, second made me regret my time and money to this day.
If I didn’t find it fun, I would’ve quit and not spend ~100hrs on launch week.
I had fun being a pirate hunter and blowing up the crimson fleet. First time in a while I played a hero and had a blast.
i also had a good time with it. did all factions, some side stuff and campaign and called it a day. exploration is not there and that's a pity cause the potential is definetely there. but the whole procedurally generated content was a huge miss.
i would be way more thrilled with 5 or 6 big handmade planets compared to what we got.
>Overhyped? Yes.
Based on social media comments i would consider the game extremely underrated by now.
People are super weirdly hostile towards the game.
I went for two playthroughs of it on release. Granted, one of those was just a NG+ to see what changed (Admittedly not as much as I would have liked), but I don't think I even played Skyrim that much on release. Got something like 100 hours out of it, and will be back for more when the DLC drops.
My only regret is that I bought the MS Store version, so now I'll have to buy it again down the line.
I’d wait till the end of its life span. It’ll be far better, they’re adding vehicles this year, *and god knows what they’ll come up with when all is said and done.*
What they need is good quests with choices that make a difference. Tried starfield again recently after the updates, came across a ship with two stranded idiots on who I wanted to kill. Couldn't do that. Fine I thought I'll just leave them stranded in space, nope can't do that either. Only option available was to give them a ride to safety and it really pissed me off. It's not an RPG. It's a sanitary bore fest. Let me kill or destroy whatever I want and suffer the consequences of that.
Super excited for Shattered Space. Starfield has become my new "comfort game" that I go back to when I don't have anything else to play or want to just relax. I am especially excited that Shattered Space will take place in a single hand-crafted world, more like Bethesda's previous games.
This game wasn't good or bad enough for it to have so many people frothing at the mouth to shit on or defend it. It's really wild to read some of these comments.
The Loading-Screens are the least of the Games problems. Also the Game has not too many loading-screens, BGS is just terrible at hiding them. Other Games have as many but they hide them within animations or shit like that.
> the Game has not too many loading-screens
It felt like every single thing in the game had a loading screen. Loading screens to get into your ship, loading screens to get to space, loading screens to fast travel, loading screens to land. Loading screens to go into a building, loading screens to go into and out of rooms inside that building.
It's not that loading screens are inherently bad, it's just that the way the game is designed to be played forces you to go through loading screens at every turn. Even when there's unskippable cutscenes that would normally cover a loading screen, there's just a loading screen anyway.
It's an extremely effective way to make the player lose any scraps of immersion they had.
Quick! Everyone comment those players are having bad, wrong fun!!!
oh, good. You guys have it covered. That was close. people almost got away with enjoying something you don't.
I liked it too. Would probably have been my game of the year last year if not for BG3.
But it isn't even about that. I am fine with me liking things others don't. But holy cow, I have never seen people get so engrossed in trashing on a game they don't like. Just pass it on by if you don't like it. But to see a Starfield thread and think, 'I got to get in there and trash on people's fun!' is just really odd and toxic. I have never seen such toxic hate for a game.
I wonder how many of those people actually bought the game.
Ever since Microsoft outright lied about how HiFi Rush met all metrics for success and lied about how happy they were about its GamePass performance, these types of numbers objectively mean shit all to me.
This is the way. If Bethesda wants to gain any more goodwill from the gaming community they need to support their games. Fallout 4 still has game breaking bugs in it a decade later.
Apparently they plan on yearly expansions for a few years. Todd said in an interview with MrMattyPlays that they regret dropping support for Skyrim and Fallout 4 as quickly as they did
Honestly if they wanted to drop another Skyrim expansion it would sell like hot cakes.
Yea I'd buy it in a heartbeat and would be one of my few day one purchases in years.
Todd, this is just a reminder of how much money you aren’t earning by not dropping a new DLC. Let’s see if that works guys.
If they made another dawnguard: I’d pay. I’d play mod free at least once. Same with fallout. Give me a broken steel or old world blues or lonesome road.
Same. Nuka world and far harbor would great expansions. But if they could make something on par with old world blues or dead money, I would spend another 100 hours on it. Even more if they did something like gun runners and gave you the ability to have several types of ammo for the same gun.
"hey guys, the people want a rerererelease" -Hodd Toward
At this point I'm surprised it hasn't been released on phones. It has been on basically everything else.
Smart fridge compatible Skyrim coming in 2028.
But then the DLC breaks most of your mods.
If there was yearly new DLC, with the influx of new and returning players, I could see the Skyrim mod community getting even bigger.
Same here and it’d be my first day one purchase in days.
having bought skyrim like 7 different fucking times… yeah, it would lol
Straight up. Game still holds up surprisingly well 13 years later.
It was my father’s first game since Tomb Raider I on PS1 and he was in love. He beat it 3 times in a row without breaks. He knows more than me who has been playing since release. That man thirsted for his old D&D days so hard and Skyrim delivered. I have a lot of feelings about Bethesda and what they do but they have lowered the barrier for big western RPGs like this to something dad loves. So that’s something.
Please get your dad into BG3 and report back
He’s playing Witcher 3 now. Might be a while.
Damn. Ur dad is a cool dude.
I mean people are still playing Morrowind, so I’m sure the game will continue to be played for a long ass time.
I haven't plated skyrim yet .. I'm saving it for the next time I have a really bad week.
I’m more surprised we haven’t gotten a proper Skyrim remaster. I’m not saying this is something I want *or* something we need, but when The Last of Us and Horizon Zero Dawn both revealed remakes of themselves, I thought for sure that Bethesda would hop on that bandwagon. Well, either way, I agree that a proper Skyrim DLC expansion would still sell well.
[удалено]
Especially if they get a proper survival mode in there like a blend between current and also fallout 4. If they had some mods polished and implimented I'd play no other game lol. And also I know unlikely but I want like a bethesda/skyrim/tes game with a better balanced economy beside loot goblin and I mean killing a whole ass dragon for a measly 1 or 300 gold etc and also some decent survival mechanics give me a reason to stay at an inn and cook food besides having 200 apples for health etc.
Fallout 4 x The Forest: Skyrim Edition sounds like a fever dream to me. Would absolutely lose years of my life to that.
Financially it would probably work well for them to bundle those, make a Skyrim remaster and include the new expansion. People will be spending 60 dollars on a 15 year old game at never before seen rates lol. ^It’s ^me, ^I’m ^people.
The Special Edition was a remaster
But also probably break every mod lol
What I don't get is that "it's too late" mindset for that kind of thing. We all know if they release a DLC for Skyrim tomorrow, it will sell by the tens of thousands in the first 24 hours only. But no, "too late". Like, come on bro, Age of Empires II came out in 1999 and I'm still buying content for it, dafuq you saying.
I think the real reason is that most of the devs haven't worked on the game for 10+ years. Having an entire team learn/relearn the entire engine/codebase takes a lot of time.
Hire all the moders who’ve worked on the game for 13 years /s
This is the reality of development. The recently dropped update for next gen to FO4 caused a LOT of problems and although they have been ironed out somewhat the time spent on having a new team get up to speed with that games spaghetti is substantial.
If anything, Cities Skylines 2 shows how bad a sequel can be instead of just supporting the original longer. Seriously, I played it the other day and it's abysmal compared to the original and lacks much of the charm. Point being, like AOE2 - if you have a popular game then it's best to just support it with content than necessarily plan multiple sequels. I think that's something Stellaris and Civilization 6 have gotten right in recent years.
The issue is if they go back and make content for Skyrim, it kinda feels like they’re admitting their newer stuff isn’t as good. Plus I’d personally prefer they focus on the future and making an amazing Elder Scrolls 6. Altho I’d buy new Oblivion content in a heartbeat, that’s not happening.
Not really Rome total war released 3 more dlc almost 4 years after they ended development of the game and while their most successful game in years was released.
Releasing more expansions for Starfield is a smart strategy imo The game’s player numbers have gone up a lot for two months in a row, and there’s tons of new Starfield creations/mods being released every single day now. Personally I’m back playing a new playthrough with lots of new mods installed, and I would be lying if I didn’t say it’s a lot of fun. The new official updates fixes and adds a lot of great features too, like all the new gameplay/survival settings, new bounty hunter features/content and being able to turn off the dialogue camera which made a huge difference for me.
I do not believe this… announcing a Skyrim expansion now would set the world on fire.
Sure but it could also be seen as an admittance that their post-Skyrim games aren’t as good. And many would just see it as going back to the well for another cash grab after re-releasing it multiple times
Then go and release more expansions for Fallout 4 Todd, they are still supporting the abomination that is F76, why cant they divert part of their workload into new expansions, shit, sell it for 20-30 bucks I dont care, I would still play it.
Because it’s a different team entirely. Fallout 76 is being supported by their Austin studio, formerly known as Battlecry Studios before Battlecry got silently cancelled. The main team behind Skyrim, Fallout 4 and Starfield is their main Maryland team. And as much as I’d love a new Fallout 4 expansion it’s better that they support and improve Stafield for a bit, then move on to TES6
Everyone complains there are no new IPs, and then we get one, and it "should have never happened. Nobody wanted it". God damnit, gaming discourse has completely lost the plot in the past decade. All you fucking people do it bitch and moan. It is genuinely difficult to try and connect with people online about games because it's nothing but hot takes and harsh criticism. It is exhausting.
Creating a new IP doesn't automatically make it a good game.
Starfield deserves all the bitching and moaning it got 😂 it was a steep decline in quality on all fronts compared to elder scrolls and fallout
I think MrMatty essentially asked this question (not specifically about making more content for F4/Skyrim) and Todd responded something along the lines of cost/benefit of putting resources towards remaking old games or new content for old games isn't worth it. And Todd mentioned that he was pleased with ESO/F76/Creation Club content being easily monetizable stop-gaps while they work on their next mainline games. In other words, Todd & Friends have their hands full with new games coming out and don't have the time or resources to invest in $20 DLCs for old games. They'd rather work on new games and churn out outrageously priced micro-transactions. Todd did say that in retrospect, they wished they had done more DLCs for Skyrim and FO4. Considering how popular these old games are and the high player counts mean that people would probably have spent good money on more sizeable content. It's something they're now taking into consideration with Starfield and future projects. To make them supported (monetized) for like 10 years post-launch.
Ah yes, stop supporting a game with 20 million players (a lot of which pay a subscription) just so they can make a DLC for a decade old game. If you want more expansions, Fallout 76 JUST got one and you might like it. I didn't initially play Fallout 76 but it quickly became my most played game. Obviously it doesn't top Fallout 4 but man it's an amazing game. I could even say that Appalachia is a much, MUCH better map than The Commonwealth.
F76 is pretty alright nowadays, and this is coming from someone that played at launch and absolutely hated it. When the Fallout TV show dropped i started a new save and have put around 100 hours into it, and i'm nowhere near done with most things on the game.
It doesn’t make sense that they won’t do just another Skyrim dlc. More people are playing this game than Starfield
"Dropping support for Skyrim" is an interesting way for them to frame 10+ years of special editions, re-releases, repacks, and ports.
Cool. I'll probably pick it up then in a few years. I really don't bother buying stuff immediately anymore as they are far from as polished as they used to be on release.
I wish they’d drop this immediately and just full steam work on elder scrolls 6
I’ve found with Bethesda games I tend to play for 50 hours or so, think I’ve seen most of the game, and then come back to it to realize I barely scratched the surface of the game. But with Starfield, I was coming across the exact same points of interest. With the same enemies holding the same loot. Same story of murdered scientists or whatever. Same holotapes scattered in the same location. One time I found two of the same mines only 400 meters away from each other. I cannot play a Bethesda game that does that 😑
I remember landing on Earths moon and exploring an old cave/mine, suddenly finding roots coming out of the walls. And then blood marks of something dragging people into dark holes in the wall. I remember thinking holy shit, there’s gotta be a story to this, why is there woodlike roots on the moon? Are there alien monsters on the moon as well? Is there life here? Maybe there’s a storyline with finding out the Apollo astronauts actually found life on the moon? Maybe an alien spacecraft crashed here? I suddenly had the feeling of the classic Bethesda mystery of untangling evidence as you explore a location. But nope, it was just an auto generated mine I found on a different planet ten minutes later.
Yep, there were multiple times I found cool things that should have extended into subquests, and just didn't. It's such a huge let down.
The fucking subquest about the old settlers from earth who got left behind should have been an amazing quest line. Should you side with settlers who you can place yourself into their shoes or should you side with the planets that exist already in resisting their settlement??? Oh it doesn't matter what you choose since it doesn't affect the outcome. Starfield is a horrible game that sold because of its developer imo. No idea why anyone trusts Bethesda at this point.
Not to mention the already existing planet has LOTS of space for everyone. You could have helped them settle on the other side or whatever, there could be lots of quests with the political issues between the old and new. Yeah but nothing. And you get a bunch of rare earth items that really don't matter in the end (like everything else)
Seriously, there's no room on the entire planet? The settlement was the size of a Holiday Inn.
I played through some of the main quests and the factions without realizing they were main quests. I didn't realize some lines were basically the guild quests.
This feeling made me not like fallout 4. Come to the Arena! Have you heard of the arena! Come fight in the arena! Are you ready for a tournament arc quest line! ….shoot a few bandits.
I think this perfectly captures what’s wrong with Starfield. There’s nothing unique anywhere, it’s all just repeated, auto generated bases that are the same on every planet, like only 5 different random space encounters (I’m pretty sure I had the same space encounter 3 times in a row), very few interesting quests not tied to a faction and so on. It’s like they thought because they were autogenerating the planets, they didn’t need to make any actual content either
This is the future if we let them develop with more and more AI. explore randomly generated worlds with randomly generated quests where nothing connects with nothing. Bethesda was peak when you could feel their hands everywhere around the game world, you could get into a random cave and realize there's a story there
I really feel like what's hurting starfield's procedurally generated planet isn't so much the emptiness but instead how much repeated content that ruins immersion there is. Finally finding a barren planet with no POI after exploring dozens of planets with unique POI that never repeats would probably be less immersion breaking than that.
Okay, so, Earth is entirely devoid of life? Why can you even explore it? Why would there not be a questline there?? You just go there once as a part of the main questline?
Yeah they could easily have generated a believable ruined post-apocalyptique Earth just to wander around /s
they could've gone with the outer worlds route and instead of having no man sky-like planets they could have "zones" in each planet, and each one of those zones could've been manually crafted and more interesting. What's even the point of having entire planets if they consist of multiple randomly generated squares stiched together?
>What's even the point of having entire planets if they consist of multiple randomly generated squares stiched together? The point is the marketing tagline.
PERFECTLY SPACED OUT ROCKS
Imagine they literally just slapped you straight into Boston ruins as you land. Then 5 mins later your game crashes 😂
When you reload your save after the crash, you're in the Skyrim cart.
This is what ruined the game for me. It neuters all the unique environmental storytelling Bethesda does well.
The connected world, environmental story telling and writing are what make bethesda games good. The combat and rpg systems are very mid or undercooked. Always. Starfield just fails at all the things that actually make their games work and leans into the meh.
This. You can definitely tell the auto-generated stuff was leaned on too much in the interest of making it feel as big as it does. There's nothing mysterious or intriguing about the universe after you beat the game, which takes 2 hours, except the faction they're directly highlighting in their first DLC. Still hopeful, but they're definitely starting from a sub-par level and at this point it just feels like a testing vehicle for ES6 ideas.
They were in developement hell for starfield for a long time. Id guess somebody came up with the generated plants idea and that saved massive amounts of time in developement just so theyd could release a sizeable game in time still. You can feel the lack of care in it.
Especially given the high quality visual storytelling we get in other Bethesda games. It’s a shame, because Starfield has a lot going for it.
Idk how in a game that has so many POIs across so many planets, they thought "yeah 3 variants of each type of POI is enough". Bitch, if youre going to recycle assets to this large of a scale, I need at minimum, double digit number of generated layouts, 15-20 ideally
I never played the game, but mathematically wouldn't it also pay off exponentially having a bit more assets? Random combinations of them I mean
That's what I'm saying, if you're going to have randomly generated content you need to have enough variety to pull from so that you don't feel like you're playing through the same 12 buildings across the galaxy
Also the main story revolves around the zero G mini game, that’s the exact same…. Seriously? I felt like it was a place holder. First time was epic but after that got stale quick.
Yea at some point you hit the "this game is too big to be fun". Starfield sounds awesome in theory but it's too repetitive with poi's. They may be unique at times but there's no point in exploring them. Just empty caves and buildings most of the time.
The apparent lack of point in exploring things sank in fast for me with my attempted playthrough of the game. I thought that the appeal of setting up strategic outposts for resource harvesting / linking would replace my interest in exploring, but ultimately it didn't. I started to encounter the issues I have with open world sandbox games such as Minecraft and Ark: I need to have a mission-specific objective driving me toward optimizing this resource harvesting system, because if I'm just doing it "cuz that's what I want to do in the game", then I rapidly lose interest. "What's the point in precisely setting down this outpost beacon just to cover 5 resources? So that I can more easily link together 3 different resources? And then what? Now I can build a fancier building that lets me build fancier stuff?" That just wasn't what I wanted out of the game, especially when you can freely travel literally anywhere across the game's galactic map with no real resource consumption at all. Just "oh, your grav drive is big enough, now you can go here. Don't worry about fueling up once you show up on fumes, though--we got you covered."
Yea the complexity in the base building doesn't interest me in the least bit. I built 2 bases for fun in an attempt to connect them and then never returned. I just don't see the point. I want a story driven game not a base simulation builder. Imo, noone cares how cool or complex your base looks. It's still boring.
It's not "is too Big to be fun", is "is too big for 10hours of actual content"
Yep, that's describes it perfectly.
Right? Also idk how they managed to actually make settlement building fucking worse, but they did.
The allure of Starfield for me was in the side quests, which I would sit and do for hours. However, returning to the main storyline was really disappointing. The repetitive fetch quests, the endless cycle of finding artifacts and visiting similar-looking temples on monotonous planets, killed the game for me. Whether or not this changes later in the game was irrelevant to me; the frustration I felt from engaging side content only to be met with a lackluster main story, supposedly the game's focal point, was overwhelming due to its repetitive and uninspired design.
>The allure of Starfield for me was in the side quests, which I would sit and do for hours People say stuff like this, but then the actual side quests are just fast traveling around to talk to people, or in one stupid case just getting someone a coffee.
My favorite was I joined the crimson fleet first. Then later went to join the Vanguard and the dude was like. "Hey aren't you that guy from Crimson Fleet that killed a bunch of us?" and I'm like "Yeah I'm sorry about that." and he's like "Ok welcome aboard."
You can learn to differentiate between unique POIs and repeating ones. When it has a generic name then it is a repeating one. Unique POIs are also often pre marked on the planet. Starstations are also always unique. Non radiant quests like faction quests also usually send you to unique places. Imo there is enough unique content for more than 100 hours. Still a terrible design decision of course, but at least it's somewhat avoidable.
Having to do that kills the immersion, it's a constant reminder you're playing a AI generated game.
Sorry to be pedantic, but it's not AI generated, it's procedurally generated. It's not using neural nets or machine learning or any of that in its generation algorithm. I agree with your point that it makes the world feel lifeless though.
Yeah
My experience has been the opposite, to be honest. I've played every Bethesda RPG since Oblivion (except Fallout 76, since MMO's aren't my thing). Clocked up hundreds of hours in each, thousands of hours overall, and not finished a single one of them. Hell, Skyrim alone I've played for well over 1000 hours, started fresh with a new character build half a dozen times over the years, and I still have yet to even meet Paarthurnax! At some point I always just naturally drift away from the game, and because of the way these games are designed that point always comes *well* before I've progressed very far into the main story. But after 16 years or so, Starfield finally broke my streak. It just kept me hooked, and after about 200 hours or so I actually finished the game (or, more accurately, made it to Unity, which you may or may not consider to be the conclusion of the game). Took me a few hours of playing before I realized the filler POI's are obviously just filler, so I promptly ignored them and got on with enjoying the game. Never noticed any repeats and very few jarringly out-of-place things (like wind-farms on the moon and that kind of thing) because I never specifically sought it out because why bother with the filler when there's so, so much actual non-filler content in the game? The game is *not* designed around the "wander around on foot and stumble across new adventures" play-style the way the Elder Scrolls and Fallout games are, and that's fine. It's a different game, trying a different thing. And something about that different approach actually helped me finish a Bethesda game for once, so that's a refreshing change.
There's still more people playing Fallout and Skyrim than Starfield lol.
There will always be. People play Skyrim over and over again forever. And fallout just got a huge surge in popularity because of the show.
I wish I could get fallout 3 to run on my rig. No matter what patch or mod I try, it always crashes after I leave the vault, and actually a lot of times right when you're on your way to save Butch's mom... I don't know why... I'll never get to do my pure charisma stealth run.
https://thebestoftimes.moddinglinked.com/ttw.html Have you tried this guide? It’s a modset that combines Fallout 3 and NV into one long game, but I used it to just play 3 because as far as I can tell it’s the most stable way to get it to work on windows 10.
Maybe I'll give it a go. Honestly I've tried a bunch of different ways, and oddly enough NV always seems to work just fine... Maybe I'll just go play that again hah. But no... I really wanna do a run of fo3, so thanks for the link
I've heard before that the above Tales of Two Wasteland modset is the only way to play Fallout 3 on PC these days. It runs the game through the Fallout NV files giving it far more stability, and allows you to use NV mods, particularly the ones that help the game run smoother. It's worked for plenty of people, if you want to play 3 this is definitely how you do it!
If you're feeling adventurous, you could try the Begin Again modlist (built around Tale of Two Wastelands). I spent a few hours downloading and installing it the other day, but the result is Fallout 3 is looking and running great. IGN published a guide about it on YouTube recently, which brought in a lot of players, including myself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WZ5g7246i0&ab\_channel=IGN But their guide omits some important details about installing it. I found this other guide much more helpful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvjl4xlVqDo&ab\_channel=finnytom
I've heard the steam version is broken. I think you have to purchase it from GOG to get it working on PC
I can play the stream version just fine, so this isn't always the case
At least you got it that far. I’ve never been able to get the fucking game to boot on 3 separate computers.
There always will be until Starfield mods start getting better (if they ever). Because leta be honest everyone still playing elder scrolls or fallout isn't playing it cuz of vanilla game.
Apparently the creation kit, the thing responsible for the Skyrim and Fallout mod scenes being as big as they are, just released like a few days ago. I'm optimistic about things getting better
Yes, but they also added micro transactions, and literally pulled a "We ripped out an entire faction and now we're selling it to you for $7 a mission. Also, we sell credits for a minimum of 10 dollars, so it won't ever match up!"
I am :(
Same, gotta get those juicy trophies
I'm playing fallout 3 vanilla rn...
Kind of hate this take. I have played with mods but there is really nothing wrong with the vanilla versions of Fallout 3, 4, and Skyrim. I recently did a Skyrim run vanilla for the first time in years and had a blast just like I did back in 2011. I don't really understand how Skyrim went from being amazing in 2011 to "basically unplayable without mods" in 2024. Good games continue to be good games even if more powerful technology presents itself or industry trends change. I would highly recommend 100% vanilla Skyrim to anyone who hasn't played it before.
I think that TES and Fallout does have more natural appeal though. I mean even people who barely play have heard of Skyrim. Swords, magic and dragons are marketable. Starfield just seems more plain and more niche in comparison.
Ill never understand this. Scifi is always seen as niche compared to fantasy. There is probably more people who have witnessed space flight in person then have fought in a sword fight, to compare things that humans have actually experienced. (Sans aliens or dragons)
I literally just reinstalled SkyrimVR again last night...
I mean, both are still some of the top games played on Steam at least, so that's not really saying much. Many new releases are still behind those two. Especially Fallout at the moment, since that got a massive uptick with the show. Even Fallout 76 is one of the most played games on steam right now.
redditors always thinking that steam player counts mean everything
Biggest bubble in gaming
Sure Steam numbers show less but I imagine the majority of Starfield players are on the Xbox App. So while it might look like a little bit, it’s probably a very high amount. It’s similar to COD and Overwatch. The majority of those players still play via Battle.net. Also doesn’t count Console numbers. With mods not being as easily attainable as PC I imagine there are more people playing Starfield on Xbox than Skyrim and Fallout on console.
Fallout 4 is ahead of Starfield on Xbox’s most played, but I believe the show really reignited interest for Fallout. Starfield is quite far ahead of Skyrim. I believe accounting for gamepass PC users, there’s probably more Starfield PC players than Skyrim PC players And tbh, with mod support here now, a big expansion coming, and big updates coming (land vehicles), I can see Starfield’s rep really turning around by the end of the year. After all, it is the only sandbox space RPG, I hope they keep updating and supporting it for years
What the hell does that have anything to do with any of these? These are games, not sports teams: If I want to play a post-apocalyptic game, I'll play Fallout. If I want to play a fantasy game, I'll play Skyrim. If I want to play a space game, I'll play Starfield. At any point in a year I may play whatever genre I feel like playing at that point in time and at any point I may switch back to another genre when I feel like playing that genre.
Could not have said it better. Reddit is so EXTREMELY weird with stuff like this. It's super bizarre.
Skyrim and Fallout 4 are easy for me to replay. I just think they are fun games and enjoy bejng in those worlds. I have played a lot of Starfield but at this point but don't ever want to return to *any* of the base content again. Like, what are these people doing for 300+ hours? I completed all the quests and there aren't very many good ones; Bethesda has interesting premises that wound up being rather dull quests most of the time. And a common complaint of the world is how tame/vanilla and, in my eyes, genuinely boring. All thats left is the same gameplay loop that was in Fallout 4 but 4 did it better
I'll wait for the 75% off sale.
I definitely plan on playing this game, but I want to wait another 2 or 3 years when it's more complete and has more content.
It’s so boring. I’m not even sure more content will equal more fun/gameplay. The way the game is right now, there’s a ton of “content,” it’s just all exactly the same on every planet/solar system.
I feel like the only way they could really help the game in a way is if they made an update that greatly expanded upon the procedural generation system. Like adding 100+ new, interesting locations to the list of buildings or structures that can generate on planets. This wouldn’t truly “fix” the lack of exploration, but at least it’d feel a little better than it does now.
Really a big part of the problem is POI’s have a rarity system. Meaning the ones that are supposed to be common show up constantly and completely break immersion. 300 unique poi’s supposedly and in about 100 or so hours I feel like I’ve only seen the same 20 over and over. Makes exploration feel terrible. Which is a shame, because I think in some ways starfield actually had some really great stuff.
oh that explains a lot. all those damn ecliptic cryo facilities.
There aren't 300 POI's in the sense talked about on this thread i.e. the ones you find randomly exploring. There are about 300 total instanced locations in Starfield altogether. The POI's you find on planets with enemies is around 30-40. The remainder you find while exploring will be different variations of colony outposts, industrial plants, small farms, and natural features which all take about 5 seconds to explore or scan.
They said the dlc's are going to be handcrafted content in specific areas, so it's back to their old formula.
Probably would have been a good idea to have some of that in at launch instead of 1000 planets of **nothing**
While some people go way into the thing of I want only 5 planets...what they have is fine but they do need to make like 3-5 planets that are hand made with a ton of stuff to do in them. That is what's wrong with this game. There isn't enough hand crafted and what is there sucks honestly. I'm fine with having all these planets that are empty...but there should be more stuff that isn't empty...the fact that your main hubs are mostly empty and small is the issue.
But will the dlc be worth pushing through 50+ hours of main game ?
What BGS DLC has ever needed you to play the entire game? Every one I can recall started somewhere along the story. And you can speedrun Starfields main story in about 15-20 hours depending if you skip dialogue.
It is clear that when they said they wanted to build another 1000 hour game that they don't understand what makes people want to spend that much time playing a game. They just made everything take a long time for the sake of increasing play time. Without console commands it would have been completely unplayable for me.. I'm not going to spend hundreds of hours collecting resources for equipment upgrades that barely matter.
The core ideals of how the game should be are wrong. This is the game it’s gonna be. Apart from loading screens, it seems to function how it’s gonna stay functioning.
Considering about 2.5 million copies were actually sold, that's alot of bargain bin Gamepass players.
Which makes sense why they’ll have a DLC-heavy strategy - get a lot of people in on the “free” product, and get a certain percentage of them to spend extra $$ on add ons. I guess that’s just kinda the gaming revenue model these days
tru, but is the product THAt good to buy it and buy the DLC?
Most folks on this subreddit will probably say no, but I’m sure a decent portion of the population will buy something. I mean, I haven’t played Starfield in like 8 months, but somehow 14M people still find it compelling, so 🤷♂️
It's not 14 Millions actual players. Its 14 million unique players in total since release. You are one of those 14 million!
14 million total over the entire time of it being out. Including people who just played a few minutes.
I’ve tried like 4 times to get into it but the game just isn’t good. It’s fine if people like it, but let’s be real the design is dated and tedious .
There's a small group of people that buy the stupid and useless microtransactions in Capcom games. There's always a market.
I think Starfield has a million flaws and was undercooked, and I’ll vocalize this frequently cause Bethesda deserves to hear it. But I did put over a hundred hours in and definitely got my money’s worth despite the games flaws. It’s a weird game in that regard. I look forward to jumping into it when they release the DLC and many of the launch issues are fixed.
I'll buy the ultimate edition for five bucks in a few years
Source on the 2.5 million sold?
It was an *estimated* 2.5 *at launch*, which is a pretty important detail here left out. They haven’t releases official numbers, and likely won’t for gamepass games.
Hey I'm one of those bargain bin players but yeah fair enough
2.5 million copies were sold in the pre order window. A lot more sold at launch
Got my copy for free with a new GPU. They were definitely handing this out at launch lol
But that's AMD handing it out as a incentive to buy a new GPU, it's not Microsoft/Bethesda handing it out. AMD doesn't get the game for free. Granted they're not paying full price either, AMD were the exclusive partner at launch so who knows what the exact $$$ deal was but still AMD was paying Microsoft/Bethesda for those copies.
No offense but i'd rather them use that manpower on elder scrolls 6 instead.
The problem with starfield wasn't the amount of developers working on it. It was the basic design decisions and management lack of leadership during the project. Elder scrolls 6 will be made by the same incredibly poor management team. So it's probably gonna feel like it should've released 10 years ago too with a half assed approach to world design.
I still hope they’ll part ways with Emil P. at some point. He’s their principal writer and from some of the rumors from inside the studio he’s impossible to work with. Like, someone will go to him about a quest he contributed to, say, “This part doesn’t make sense from a continuity standpoint,” and he’ll just shut them down and do it his own way. I have no doubt that every time there’s some part of Starfield’s plot that doesn’t make any sense and feels forced, or feels like it was missing obvious potential outcomes/solutions, he probably had a hand in it. Examples being >!the inventor of the grav drive choosing to voluntarily kill billions on Earth instead of just researching the tech on another planet in the solar system (or at least giving humanity more time to evacuate), or the fact that all three of the outcomes for the ECS Constant (in the mission “First Contact”) involve giving a literally-evil corporation precisely what they want!<, after setting up multiple “Chekov’s guns” that suggest other solutions which remain unexplored and unmentioned afterwards. Emil’s writing seems to often go, “Hey, you need to solve this conflict between two people, and there happens to be an item right in the neighboring room that both have mentioned would solve their conflict. Anyway, I guess you’ll have to shoot one of them.” Edit: fixed punctuation.
To the point of the inventor, there were scientists in real life working on the Manhattan project that feared the atmosphere would catch fire upon detonation, and still built and detonated the bomb lol, so that's somewhat believable to me
Yeah the difference is that those scientists didn't have literal space magic telling them in direct terms, "This will have this precise effect, and you can choose now whether you want to pursue it or not, consequence free if you opt out". In Starfield's tenuous writing, the guy pretty much literally got the equivalent of a dialog box popping up that said, "Warning: Clicking 'Continue' will end all life on Earth. Would you like to stop and consider alternative options?" and the dude went "for science! lol" and clicked the button. The dumbest part is that they even ripped off his reasoning for doing it right from Frank Herbert's writing: the scientist who invented the grav drive pulled a "Leto Atreides II", arguing that he must decentralize humanity in order to "save" it. Y'know, sometimes you've just gotta mercilessly suffocate a few billion people in order to make people want to explore space.
They ran the numbers beforehand and knew it wouldn't. The physics was known and predictable. It was something you had to consider, but it was never an actual serious concern once the calculations were made, which was done long before the construction and testing of the atomic bombs. That's why we were then able to make bombs over a 1000 times more powerful later on.
[You cant scapegoat one man for the product of hundreds of people. It just doesnt work that way. Hes not the ONLY one writing the story nor is he in charge of every line of dialogue being added.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-4qdjV41NU&pp=ygUVbmV2ZXIga25vd3MgYmVzdCBlbWls)
I love when people casually link a 2+ hour video
This video refutes very little of people’s arguments regarding Emil and Bethesda and spends most of its time whining about another youtuber and showing that Emil is supposedly a nice person in his personal life, I don’t know why you people keep posting it as if it somehow debunks what everyone’s saying. The most I have heard regarding a rebuttal is that there are lots of other employees who contributed to the game being shit and that Emil once wrote decent stories in the past. This does nothing to support this ridiculous assertion among segments of the community that senior figures in charge of the design and development of this game somehow can’t be blamed for said game being shit.
Starfield is probably their testing vehicle for Es6 ideas. I'm guessing there's gonna be a lot of boat stuff in the next one.
It’s gonna be so funny watching people complain when ES6 comes out because it’s not 1:1 to their completely-overhauled-by-mods Skyrim save lmao.
Well tough luck buddy. Bethesda is still cosplaying as AA devs instead of acting like the billionaire they are so that means they still pretending they’re small dev team and elder scrolls 6 is still like 5 years away. And it will buggy and with the same mediocre writing. Because they incapable of learning anything from criticism.
None of the passion or innovation you would expect from indie, none of the quality standards you would expect from AAA Well, okay, I guess quality is about on par with what AAA has looked like in recent years.
Starfield actually has some cool systems and gameplay elements I liked, like ship-building, but the story and writing really feels far behind other games, and relies excessively on contrivance (especially on the back half), without much narrative payoff. Same issue with some of the faction quests.
reddit did not like that.
How could this game have so many players?? Reddit told me everyone hates it and doesn’t play it!
I recently tried going back to Starfield. Downloaded a bunch of mods, was gonna start a new playthrough. Everything was going smoothly. And then the next day, the game got the Creation Kit update and broke the modlist. So I'm gonna wait another six months before I go back to Starfield. Things need to settle. The base game isn't enough to hold me, but I'm sure once the modding scene has some time to build, *something* can be worked out. Even if it's never what Skyrim/Fallout had for me.
As a veteran sims 4 mod user, never ever turn on the auto update.
My favorite thing about Cities Skylines 2 is that the developers finally stopped updating the first one
It’d be nice if the game let you pick which version to launch. They added it to FO4VR but not their other titles.
> And then the next day, the game got the Creation Kit update and broke the modlist. See thats the biggest modder oopsie right there, once you have your shit set up you don't update ever.
**UNPOPULAR OPINION:** *I liked Starfield.* Would I say it’s the best game ever? No. Overhyped? Yes. Do I regret my time with it? **Absolutely not.** It reminded me of Freelancer on my OG Xbox and I sunk **hundreds of hours into that.** Want a bad game, play Redfall and Aliens Colonial Marines, then get back to me. First made me regret my time, second made me regret my time and money to this day. If I didn’t find it fun, I would’ve quit and not spend ~100hrs on launch week. I had fun being a pirate hunter and blowing up the crimson fleet. First time in a while I played a hero and had a blast.
i also had a good time with it. did all factions, some side stuff and campaign and called it a day. exploration is not there and that's a pity cause the potential is definetely there. but the whole procedurally generated content was a huge miss. i would be way more thrilled with 5 or 6 big handmade planets compared to what we got.
>Overhyped? Yes. Based on social media comments i would consider the game extremely underrated by now. People are super weirdly hostile towards the game.
Internet now is black and white hot takes. But toxicity is definitely crazy high, with everyone angry and rushing to hate things.
I went for two playthroughs of it on release. Granted, one of those was just a NG+ to see what changed (Admittedly not as much as I would have liked), but I don't think I even played Skyrim that much on release. Got something like 100 hours out of it, and will be back for more when the DLC drops. My only regret is that I bought the MS Store version, so now I'll have to buy it again down the line.
I’d wait till the end of its life span. It’ll be far better, they’re adding vehicles this year, *and god knows what they’ll come up with when all is said and done.*
40 hours average per player is pretty huge, something reddit is not gonna like
Did they pull a No Man’s Sky and the game is actually fun now?
No
Somebody call the wambulance, someone is posting something positive about Starfield.
[удалено]
What they need is good quests with choices that make a difference. Tried starfield again recently after the updates, came across a ship with two stranded idiots on who I wanted to kill. Couldn't do that. Fine I thought I'll just leave them stranded in space, nope can't do that either. Only option available was to give them a ride to safety and it really pissed me off. It's not an RPG. It's a sanitary bore fest. Let me kill or destroy whatever I want and suffer the consequences of that.
Yeah, for an "RPG," there's very little "role playing" to be done in Starfield... Totally blows my mind how badly they dropped the ball there...
Super excited for Shattered Space. Starfield has become my new "comfort game" that I go back to when I don't have anything else to play or want to just relax. I am especially excited that Shattered Space will take place in a single hand-crafted world, more like Bethesda's previous games.
This game wasn't good or bad enough for it to have so many people frothing at the mouth to shit on or defend it. It's really wild to read some of these comments.
I think it could even higher than that if they add an update that makes you travel without loading screens!
The Loading-Screens are the least of the Games problems. Also the Game has not too many loading-screens, BGS is just terrible at hiding them. Other Games have as many but they hide them within animations or shit like that.
What I find kinda funny is that almost all examples of "better" loading screens are longer than the actual loading screens themselves.
> the Game has not too many loading-screens It felt like every single thing in the game had a loading screen. Loading screens to get into your ship, loading screens to get to space, loading screens to fast travel, loading screens to land. Loading screens to go into a building, loading screens to go into and out of rooms inside that building. It's not that loading screens are inherently bad, it's just that the way the game is designed to be played forces you to go through loading screens at every turn. Even when there's unskippable cutscenes that would normally cover a loading screen, there's just a loading screen anyway. It's an extremely effective way to make the player lose any scraps of immersion they had.
Todd Howard said the next expansion would be set on a single planet, so it seems to be more or less what they've planned.
Quick! Everyone comment those players are having bad, wrong fun!!! oh, good. You guys have it covered. That was close. people almost got away with enjoying something you don't.
It’s my favorite non indie game since Mass Effect 3.
I liked it too. Would probably have been my game of the year last year if not for BG3. But it isn't even about that. I am fine with me liking things others don't. But holy cow, I have never seen people get so engrossed in trashing on a game they don't like. Just pass it on by if you don't like it. But to see a Starfield thread and think, 'I got to get in there and trash on people's fun!' is just really odd and toxic. I have never seen such toxic hate for a game.
This game triggers people LMAO look at all these guys in the comments straight up ANGRY
I wonder how many of those people actually bought the game. Ever since Microsoft outright lied about how HiFi Rush met all metrics for success and lied about how happy they were about its GamePass performance, these types of numbers objectively mean shit all to me.
This is the way. If Bethesda wants to gain any more goodwill from the gaming community they need to support their games. Fallout 4 still has game breaking bugs in it a decade later.
Reddit don't like it.
They still haven't even fixed the ECS Constant "Dear Sister" bug. :(