all 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

As a person who knows nothing about this game and only understands kerbal space program:

  1. Why are you thrusting forward while trying to decrease speed?
  2. That re-entry angle and velocity are far to steep and fast. 1000% chance of death.
  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 hours ago

    TL;DR: This is impressive, however for me personally seeing cool Bethesda mods is so bittersweet at this point. Like imagine the kinds of things you could do if you put that effort into somewhere more appreciated. Idk.

    I certainly don't mean to insult anyone's efforts, I imagine Bethesda games do offer some real value for budding game developers in the form of a very accessible entrypoint into modding and I think that's great.

    But what would be even better is if this company weren't basically entirely surviving off the coat tails of their community of unpaid laborers. The only reason why these games are so moddable is because Bethesda as a company wouldn't survive if they weren't. The product being given by itself is so bad and Bethesda so inept that it compelled people to learn how to fix it themselves just to deliver on what could've been.

    Bethesda basically sells you the idea of a game, delivers about 60% of it and then asks you to make up the difference. Anyone playing Skyrim or Fallout 4 could see how good those games could've been even with no prior game design knowledge, it's just an innate feeling.

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

    It’s such an intrgral feature for space flight games (IMO) and it saddens me to see that after all these years they still haven’t implemented it, and the community has to step in.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

    i just think the idea of spreading out a Bathesda RPG over an entire galaxy was flawed even if it had seamless planet landing from the beginning. constantly flying between solar systems for different quests, often in the same quest, is just tedious as hell even if it was seamless.

    In order for it to work they need to make the spaceflight/combat/space itself more compelling and worthwhile. In Elder Scrolls and Fallout, exploration between quests is fun because there are chance encounters, side quests, unmarked dungeons, easter eggs, great scenery, etc. There was almost none of that in Starfield, although you could tell they tried to inject some.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 5 hours ago (4 children)

    I'll stick with Elite Dangerous. Can already do this, and it has a whole galaxy to explore, and costs like $15. And it doesn't have tons of bugs and crashes.. and works great on Linux.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago* (2 children)

    I played elite dangerous for a while, was fun. But I got tired of grinding for new ships. I was just going out to kill ships for money all the time. I dont remember exploring much... What is there to explore?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 7 hours ago (8 children)

    Still haven't bought it...I tried at launch. Laughed and cried, then refunded. How is it now? Except the unchangeable fundamental flaw (to me!) of procedural generation.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 6 hours ago (5 children)

    Nothing has changed enough to make it worth checking out again. If you didn't like it at launch, you still won't like it now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

    Well, if you ignore mods maybe. But now there are a lot of mods that can fix everything. The problem is it is pretty time consuming to get all the mods set up and its not very user friendly to need to use mods from the start of the game.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

    There are mods that make the story better? That add environmental story-telling? That make the AI behave more intelligently than a zombie? That give a reason to engage with most of the systems that fall completely outside the standard loop?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago*

    Theres that whole Star Wars Genesis total conversion mod that changes basically everything, yeah. I haven't tried it myself yet, but it makes a lot of changes.

    Though honestly if those are all your complaints, it seems like you don't want to play the game regardless, whether its modded or not. You just want to play a completely different game. That's like asking if adding various spices and switching different kinds of cheeses makes a Cheeseburger into a Lobster dinner.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 5 hours ago* (1 child)

    This. I played it a bit at launch and gave it another fair shake recently. There were some QoL mods that fixed a few major issues I had with the game, and some of the updates they added since were appreciated.

    But I think the game is just flawed at its core. It's got a lot of neat set dressing around it, but it's missing some key central pillars to support its gameplay loop. I can't say it's a bad game because I still ended up sinking a good few hours into it, but both times I walked away from it, it was from lack of motivation to continue.

    For me at least, I think I couldn't stop comparing its various systems to better games.

    I could play Starfield for the story and RPG mechanics, or I could play Cyberpunk 2077.

    I could play Starfield for the planetary exploration, or I could play No Man's Sky.

    I could play Starfield for the base building and resource economy, or I could play Satisfactory.

    Now, none of those other games individually attempted to do what Starfield did in a single package, which you'd think should still give it a niche of its own. But when all of these systems in Starfield just sit in isolation and don't really cross one another, it means you're basically playing several "meh" games instead of one decent one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 hours ago*

    The only thing really enjoyable, imo, is the shooting. And even that could be seriously improved if the NPCs didn't mostly just stand in one place making themselves easy targets. I do like the guns, tho. The Mag type weapons especially.

    It's also pretty sad that it has Fallout 4's settlement system, which was fine, could have been better... But they somehow made it even more irrelevant.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 5 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 child)

    It depends on where you go and how you interact with the game content, main story is the weakest part of Starfield you want to do it up to a point if you care about unlocking some extra gameplay features. Other than that, the factions storylines are much better and really fun. Also the game has few very good side quests you can google to find where they are and just go do them.

    The procedural generation only control where and what POI spawn at the zone you land inside. The POIs themselves are handcrafted and they are actually well made. They are some of the best bethesda ever created in terms of dungeons and locations to explore, many of them are massive, detailed, full of stuff and pretty unique.

    The problem is if you visit a POI once then if it spawn again you don't want to revisit it, because the PG won't change anything in the POI and they will feel very repetitive.

    The latest update has added a few really good stuff too by introducing a new resource called X-Tech which has big effect on your character weapons, ships and powers. You get it from multiple sources, but most importantly you get it as a reward at the end of a POI. So, now you have this extra incentive and nice reward for exploring these POIs.

    It also add way more handcrafted POIs to space through the new Free Lanes feature. Same thing apply from the planets POIs: They are really well made, but if you run into one you did before skip it.

    It's overall a 7 out of 10 game sometimes even less, but there's some stuff that really fun and well done inside it if you are willing to look for them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 6 hours ago (11 children)

    I'm surprised so many people make this a big deal. It's a complaint I heard since launch of the game. Some people even stopped playing or didn't even purchased the game because of this!

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

    I get what you mean, but it makes sense in context.

    Immersive "Open World" Sims with ground and space exploration have a hard time tying the two together. Often they feel like two separate games, and one of them often feels like the "second class (star) citizen". Not that making them seamlessly connected actually makes the two mechanically complimentary, but separating them by a loading screen makes this dichotomy all the more obvious. Starfield was no exception.

    To exacerbate this, Bethesda made its brand the "You see that mountain? You can climb it!" game makers (Which, to be honest, I think they started to lose the plot on what made their games good when they started saying this. But that's a different conversation.). So when they made their foray into space exploration, they really had no one else to blame when folks expected a similar "You see that planet? You can fly to it!" design philosophy.

    Though I think it would have been overlooked if the game was... good? At the very least, if it was way less bloated with low effort copy pasted fluff content. Complaints like this only tend to become so focal when people have more disappointment to express than meaningful critique can adequately convey.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 6 hours ago (7 children)

    Yaaaay, now we can do something No Man's Sky could do 10 years ago, yaaaaaaay!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 hours ago (5 children)

    Sure, some games have features others don't. I'm just surprised its a big deal for so many.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 hours ago* (2 children)

    Bethesda half-assed Starfield at almost every point they could. I've intentionally never bought the game because I knew I'd get a more fleshed out spacefaring experience with almost any other dev.

    Hell, a Minecraft spacefaring mod would be more entertaining, from the gameplay footage of Starfield I've seen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 hours ago (1 child)

    It's effectively a very fancy Fallout 4 mod. Same base engine, same crafting and upgrade system, same style of gameplay, same level up system (with very minor changes).

    It even has the lack of world content that a mod project would!

    I picked up NMS pretty recently after being thoroughly disappointed with Starfield and to be entirely honest it seems to just be the same game but better, in almost all aspects. It hits all the same core notes, did it first, and did it better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 7 hours ago
    [–] 2 points 7 hours ago

    That’s awesome!

  • source