It's... A good-ish game in my opinion. Unfortunately, thanks to it's lack of polish, I'm at endgame with many hours in and have been hit with multiple game breaking bugs. These items can actually be fixed via console command.... Which then automatically disables all achievements. This can be fixed by a simple mod and.... At the end of the day, I want to play a game, not submit my resume to be a developer/tester to Bethesda.
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
72 points (91.9% liked)
PC Gaming
11925 readers
496 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Oh, Bethesda. I remember you as you were. Back when every title felt loved. Buggy, but loved.
Starfield feels exactly like Skyrim did. Which is the problem. This isn't 2011 anymore and their faults that they refused to learn from or fix aren't cute but annoying. Bethesda is your college boyfriend who never learned to do the dishes or cook and they're 40 now.
Starfield does feel loved, just misguided, and despite its scale - oddly safe in its execution.
Gamers been taking this shit for too long..
Quit buying new releases is the only way to fight back.
This means its player count isn’t propelled by the competitive landscape of leagues and ladders keeping gamers in their seats, unlike modern titles like Overwatch or Counter-Strike.
Wait.....CS is a modern title?
CS2 i guess
Well....shit. I had no idea that even came out. Colour me surprised.
I played it for several hours when it first came out. It's ok. The little bit of story I saw was engaging. I'm interested in the world - more so than Elder Scrolls. The gameplay is what I would expect from a Bethesda RPG. But it's definitely lacking polish.
The thing is there are other games out there worth playing so there's no reason to jump into unfinished Starfield right now. BG3 is sucking up a lot of gamers' time. I'm still working on P5R that's been in my backlog for awhile. The Cyberpunk expansion came out and that's solid. There's a bunch of stuff out there to play.
I will eventually play Starfield because what I saw has potential, but I'm going to do it after it's had some improvements. I don't think there's too much reason for concern. This is about par for the course with Bethesda. It's not like they were ever knocking it out of the park with great releases on day one. There are always elements of their games that draw you in, but it's always been a little bit of a mixed bag. Considering the staying power of their previous games, I think this one will eventually get as good as the others in time.
I doubt it, the main issue with Starfield is that everything is hidden behind a bunch of UI and you can't get further than ten feet without another loading screen.
It's a space game where the spaceship doesn't matter, since you can only fly it in small skyboxes and it essentially gets used as a fast travel hub. They took all the most interesting aspects of Elite or SC and removed the parts that made it fun. Yeah I can land on a planet, but it was just a loading screen. Now I can explore, but only for a bit before I have to walk back to my ship. No ground vehicles or anything to speak of.
They shouldn't have even bothered, because they couldn't actually commit to it.
Every day it's just new lows for Starfield to hit so people keep reporting on it so MS can feel they got their money's worth out of the media deals.
What more nonsense are they going to focus on just to keep talking about this slop of a game?