Todd Howard says Starfield was 'made to be played for a long time,' but a month after launch I'm already drifting away
Todd Howard says Starfield was 'made to be played for a long time,' but a month after launch I'm already drifting away
Bethesda's biggest RPG wound up feeling a lot smaller than its earlier ones.
You're viewing a single thread.
After one week I said fuck it. Yes there is a ton of exploration, yes there are spaceships, but the whole thing is just slow, confusing and boring. Hell, if I want to play "Life", I can just go outside.
The tons of exploration you're talking about are copy-pasted identical POIs, too, with the same enemies and objects in the same locations.
I honestly don't understand what they expected us to be doing for the hundreds of hours and years they they hoped we'd be playing the game for. It's certainly the most "ocean wide, inch deep" game for what it was marketed to be.
whoa now, don’t take away Elite:Dangerous one claim to fame. They have an entire milky way of procedurally generated planets with no POIs!
I want to disagree, but you're right. Elite Dangerous really nailed the emptiness of space lol
I love that game to death and you're so right, a galaxy wide, an inch deep.
I think they expected a Skyrim style modding community to spring up over the next few years. To be fair, I think they might be right, since there are already Starfield mods and I'm still playing Skyrim 10 years after it came out.
That's what I hate about it. They made such an empty soulless game and now expect modders to make it interesting while they reap the rewards.
And that's what I like about it. Instead of sitting you down at telling you a story they give you a world to tell your own stories in. I like having the freedom to be creative, and I like seeing and exploring the creative ideas of other people. It's not something I've seen other companies really do.
That's the problem with criticizing Bethesda games. The aspect of mod compatibility and creation is at once one of its greatest strengths, and also its most obvious and provocative criticisms, and the line between the two is very difficult to distinguish from an objective point of view.
it's not something I've seen other companies really do.
And thank God for that
I'm glad you're enjoying it. I tried it and decided it wasn't for me. I'd been spoilt by Baldur's Gate 3 and Starfield feels like ancient by comparison.
It's kind of the same thing for Minecraft but you can still play Minecraft vanilla and have a good time because there's plenty in there to do and explore. The difference for me is that Minecraft provides a foundation to build upon whereas Starfield is hollow to begin with so just lacks its own identity.
Yeah but dont you already have skyrim for that? What new stories is this giving you the option for that skyrim couldnt handle, except this one doesnt start with magic and does start with guns?
And did the world need to be bone dry in order to be moddable? I dont remember skyrim being devoid of interest at all.
That may be the answer. I mean if Skyrim were not moddable it would have also been a very forgettable game.
It was incredibly disappointing when I was exploring a world and landed near a factory, killed everything then I pick a random spot and I land once more near a factory, to my surprise EVERY SINGLE THING was completely the same the same Vaa Run loot hidden in the vents, the exact same food in the living quarters, the same locked weapon rack and the same enemies at the same positions. This is the laziest fucking game I've seen in a while.
That'd be if you're crazy enough to not do any of the major quest chains or general side quests, those almost entirely take you to unique areas with their own exploration outside of the random exploration ones that you find just by exploring the galaxy.
I think it points to a larger issue with the game, which is being able to to distinguish and access the kinds of content that you want. You could easily randomly explore and end up seeing the same installation three times, or you could also randomly find other quests and go explore three unique locations and dungeons in a row instead. There is absolutely a large amount of unique content to play, though, it's disingenuous to say otherwise.
Your point is fair and works really well on its own, but in the context of the entire game, its systems, mechanics, and the entire experience they come together to create, I just can't help but feel genuinely bored and disappointed regardless. The writing feels uninspired and generic; contrary to what some people have been saying, the writing isn't a product of playing safe by the outsourced writers Bethesda used - it's just bad, like a bad paint job on your car or poorly written software.
Even trying to side with the supposedly lowlife immoral inhabitants of the game's world, you constantly hear either that they're all family and friends (despite seeing one murder another because they got ripped off), or that they didn't have a choice and still try to be "good".
This isn't what people expect from a Bethesda game in general, and from a game with ESRB rating of Mature (17+).
Again, ignoring my expectations that the game's marketing specifically built to be centered around me being able to tell my story and stuff, it's just poorly written and executed in the vast majority of aspects that matter in a game like the one Starfield is trying to be - the motifs aren't clear, the storytelling is the most basic straight-up lecture in every quest that never tries to adhere to the "show, don't tell" principles, the tasks you have to do are just boring and generic, too; it's 2023, Bethesda has published and made tons of games of various genres st this point, many of a larger caliber, yet they still purposefully choose to go with the cookie-cutter quests that involve no unique one-time mechanics or animations, rely on mostly generated animations that feel out of place most of the time, and have you feel like you're playing a game from pre-2010 that you should be able to play on a toaster, but are somehow told to upgrade to the latest hardware because the company couldn't be bothered to develop and optimize a proper experience.
The pain scratches off at way more places than just exploration in Starfield.
Two things I really like are the artstyle and building my own ships with actual interiors, but the latter actually falls short due to massive restrictions in terms of said interior designs and the fact that space is basically a big mostly empty room to teleport to and from, akin to many other places in the game; no wonder an SSD is required to play, and for the worst reasons possible in a modern AAA title of that ambition.
I loved the game at first, but a lot of that was due to my huge interest in the niche it could cover, space, and science fiction, and white unfortunately, I've discovered way too many prominent flaws while simply trying to have fun like I always managed in similar games, even from Bethesda.
I hope that mods and DLCs may save the game, but none of that is ever going to fix the game's broken carcass of poor writing and uninspired practices.
Overall pretty valid criticisms, I am able to enjoy the game pretty well because my expectations were very tempered, and I still find it to be enjoyable in most of the Bethesda ways I've come to expect, which is really a culmination of too many small touches for me to exert the effort of writing down and cataloging.
The only thing I'll say to all of that is that when you said that the writing quality wasn't what we expect of Bethesda or a mature game, that's a bit silly. I'm a Bethesda fanboy, basically, and even so I've only ever expected serviceable to middlingly poor writing out of any of their games, and that's about what I feel the internet expects as well, not that that makes the criticism invalid, the writing is... well, serviceable at best or middlingly poor at worst, and I don't really come in with any expectations for good writing out of a game rated mature, either.
All a mature rating means is whatever specific traits are listed on the rating, leisure suit Larry box office bust is rated mature, and that game's writing is not emotionally mature by any means.
You are correct about most of these issues, though. Somehow, by sheer amount of story content and stuff to acquire and build, I'll probably still spend about a hundred hours in it before modding, and modding will probably take it to unknown lengths. I do believe when Todd Howard says the game was made to be played for a long time that he's indirectly talking about the mod support and the game's premise and interplanetary setup being the most ripe for user generated content, and I believe that that'll add much beyond the game's natural life, in an even larger ratio than older Bethesda games, which is its own possible criticism.
Even still, I'd have to say that the game lets down on enough critical fronts that it'll be my least favorite Bethesda game, with the top two spots going to Oblivion and Fallout 4, for me, personally. I do also have to admit, when I look at the big picture, getting more than a hundred hours of enjoyment out of a game, even for the full $70, is good value for time spent, to me, and I do enjoy the game. I don't enjoy it massively, but I can spend time in the world and accomplish tasks and feel satisfied, or enjoy the gunplay or conversations enough that I can't complain.
I've bought other games of higher critical opinion that I spent far, far less time in, and didn't get the same amount of cumulative enjoyment out of, because they just don't tap into my brain in whatever primal way that Bethesda games fit in, even Starfield, puzzlingly enough.
How many battles with space pirates do you usually get into on the way to work.
I reach about the same level of excitement in Starfield space battle as I do cycling through the city, so it's about on the same level.