Starfield is Bethesda's Least Buggiest Game to Date, Say Sources
Starfield is Bethesda's Least Buggiest Game to Date, Say Sources - Insider Gaming
Bethesda never disappoints!
We'll need to wait for the release. Before launch cyberpunk was also getting good reviews ;)
Honestly this is what pissed me off about the reaction to cyberpunk bugs. I remember how the fallout games were at launch. And I think even now trying to play new Vegas on Xbox (360 I think?) Has an issue if your save file gets too big where the save will corrupt.
CDPR definitely over promised. But every business does. They probably should've not released on last gen consoles at all, but that is tricky as fuck. I mean when they started to dev cp2077, I doubt Sony and MS even had dev units for next gen. Probably should've delayed last gen release only, made a transparent explanation and apology, and did what they ended up doing after release. But I had a low mid tier PC that played it at a solid 60 fps without major issue at launch. And it was exactly what I had hoped.
I'll probably also really like starfield, warts and all, when it drops. These are just my type of game.
People defending CDPR when they completely lied about the product aha, consumers be crazy these days.
To be honest, half the stuff people claim they lied about was always entirely speculation hype that never had any backing.
Otherwise, for some people the game worked just fine. For others the game was nearly or entirely unplayable, and everything in between. Cdpr certainly lied and should have delayed their game's release, probably upwards of a couple years, but the situation is rarely portrayed accurately.
I guess we just imagined their trailers and dev interviews then aha
I'm not saying they didn't lie, there are many of features which were at best skeletons of the features that were expected. But I'm just saying a lot of the hype around the game was so out of control you had people on the sub reddit talking about how cool the car customization will be, or how they can't wait to play, what would've amounted to essentially, gtav but with arasaka. Talking any l about features which actively were never even slightly implied to exist.
People get way too excited for any game, should always expect a pile of shit these days and just be pleasantly surprised instead. People are die hard fans of games like CP2077 before they even release, it's not good.
But expectations don't come from nowhere, a lot of the city stuff they were selling was like GTA, but the AI didn't even release at a 2004 San Andreas level, it's still not as good as GTA AI and that's just people walking/driving around convincingly. GTA V itself was 7 years old when CP2077 released, it's not surprising people were expecting a simulation of the world to be at least as good as that. I think their scope was too big, there was probs a lot of mismanagement behind the scenes. I don't know how they spent 8 years on it and it still turned out like it did, I guess we will never know what happened. The story is the only saving grace, they should have just delayed it and tried to make it a more linear story game and just abandon any RPG-esque/open world elements that were left.
Being critical of games is good, especially ones that completely shit the bed, defending it just leads to more of that in the future. I love BG3 for example, but it has it's fair share of issues that I can point out every time I play it. Why would I not want better products? Why settle for less? There's too much submissive consumerism these days.
I played through the whole game last year and while I had fun, you can definitely tell the scope is too big. There's lots to do but when you do things, there isn't much depth. Systems that you think should be in place just aren't there. The game also has a lot of features that align with open world action games of the era like Ghost of Tsushima or Horizon Forbidden West. There's stealth, there's a crafting system, there's collectibles and fetch quests. But there's few features that align with most other role playing games. You cant get a bite to eat at nearly any restaurant. You can't have a conversation with an NPC that isn't one of the dozen that's relevant to the story. (My favorite activity in fallout is to chat with random characters about random things.) Dialogue trees are shockingly stiff and inconsequential. Most missions have choices but it boils down to "X character is alive instead of unconscious."
There's a lot more I could go into but in general it just came across like it was almost unfinished. The only mission I played that felt like a true RPG mission instead of a stealth game or a shooter was the Flathead mission, so it makes sense that's the mission they relentlessly previewed back in 2019.
Agreed. The biggest issue for me, as a PC gamer who expected bugs at launch, was really that it's a stealth/action game that was marketed as an RPG even though it has precious few consequential choices or playstyle options.
For sure. And who knows, much of that could be guerrilla marketing to stoke the hype.
Expecting cp2077 to be anything like GTA is just silly. They are entirely different games.
And the RPG elements are fine, it's already very linear, and plays like you're the focus character of a cyberpunk campaign. They did just fine on that front, so I don't really understand your critique there.
CDPR fucked up big time, but they did spend another couple of years fixing a lot of shit and adding content.
Also, Cyperpunk: Edgerunner was pretty dope.
Honestly this is what pissed me off about the reaction to cyberpunk bugs. I remember how the fallout games were at launch
I bought the fallout games at launch. I bought Cyberpunk months after launch when I found it on clearance. Cyberpunk was still far less playable for me than the fallout games were at launch.
This was due to:
Additionally, CP2077 had all the same bugs in Fallout/Elder Scrolls releases.
I usually power through buggy RPG releases, but I waited to give CP a couple more patches before actually trying to play through it.
