• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Reviews Starfield Review Thread | 87 OpenCritic, 87 Metacritic

The "user reviews" stage is going to be a disaster & will make headlines (like usual).

The game's Steam forum is already a complete wasteland. Once people are allowed to actually post so-called "reviews" everywhere, all hell will break loose.
 
touchfuzzy said:
To be fair, those are also pretty boring games.
Click to expand...
According to you, I guess. I haven't played either of the sequels, but I thought HZD and GoW 2018 were pretty good (especially the latter), and I've seen most say Forbidden West and Ragnarök are improvements over their predecessors.
 
0
Skittzo said:
Because Bethesda was one of the pioneers of open world seamless traversal.

I'm having trouble understanding why "it's a bethesda game" is in any way a reason NOT to expect seamless exploration. It's the exact opposite.
Click to expand...
seamless travel in a world like skyrim or fall out is nowhere near the scale of seamless travel on a space rpg with thousands of planets
 
romanithegreat said:
seamless travel in a world like skyrim or fall out is nowhere near the scale of seamless travel on a space rpg with thousands of planets
Click to expand...
I think the suggestion is that there’s not even the illusion of seamlessness. ’Exploration’ just feels like being shunted from one map to the next with load screens.
 
I see all of you fixated on the 7 but I can't get over the juxtaposition between that quote from GI and their final score. That reads like a 10! Why did they hedge so much in their text?
 
0
romanithegreat said:
seamless travel in a world like skyrim or fall out is nowhere near the scale of seamless travel on a space rpg with thousands of planets
Click to expand...
I'm well aware that it's technically much more challenging but the fact that they don't even try to fake it, by like adding atmosphere entry/departure scenes or anything like that, is kinda antithetical to how Bethesda games operate typically.

It's obviously the choice they made here but it feels very un-Bethesda.
 
Hajeman said:
Because I see Digital Foundry review. Exterior environment looks ewwwww. Not seamless transition (always loading) also is not good
Click to expand...
It's funny because I saw the same video and it didn't looked like a PS3 game.

I wonder why you are saying this. Really, it's almost, almost like you're some trolling dude who thought that a review thread was a good idea to spew some crap.
 
the ACG review made me feel a lot better. I trust Karak’s judgement when it comes to games, and it sounds like he loves Starfield.
 
Moltres006 said:
Hows the review thread on the other place....is it another dumpter fire full of "Belda" arguments??
Click to expand...
No idea. Haven't checked it! I think we shouldn't fixate too much or create points of discussion on what the discourse is like on other communities, especially if it's just to rag on 'em for this or that.
 
i think the reason it's not in the 90's is that it's the most polished Bethesda RPG but not the big new step for Bethesda RPGs people were hoping for
 
Mekanos said:
I always kinda take the inflated game scores as:

7: decent
8: good
9: great
10: masterpiece

7 is like the lowest an AAA game can score before it officially enters complete disaster territory.
Click to expand...

I twigged recently that scoring is now NPS Scores (if you’ve ever received a survey asking you to rate anything 0-10 after buying something or a point of service, that is NPS scoring they’re after).

Essentially:

0-6 = Detractor aka you will actively talk this thing down to people you encounter in real life or online.
7-8 = Passive you’re not really here nor there, won’t be moved to do anything.
9-10 = Promoter aka you will spread the word to others.

That’s pretty much how we are treating games nowadays really.
 
Keon said:
The "user reviews" stage is going to be a disaster & will make headlines (like usual).

The game's Steam forum is already a complete wasteland. Once people are allowed to actually post so-called "reviews" everywhere, all hell will break loose.
Click to expand...

Steam Discussion forums are always trash. Just a collection of the very worst culture "Gaming" produces. Vile weirdos who make me want to go back in time and support Jack Thompson.
 
SpaceGodzilla said:
i think the reason it's not in the 90's is that it's the most polished Bethesda RPG but not the big new step for Bethesda RPGs people were hoping for
Click to expand...
Yeah I was musing this. Back in the Skyrim days, both Bethesda and Rockstar were best in class open world, but boy have there been developments since then. Some benchmarks have now been set and some design that was the absolute best back then, isn’t so now.
 
0
Hajeman said:
Because I see Digital Foundry review. Exterior environment looks ewwwww. Not seamless transition (always loading) also is not good
Click to expand...
The zone transitions are definitely disappointing, but the environmental assets look pretty nice. Procedural to some degree, but you’re hardly going to hand craft everything in a game this large. I feel like your memory of PS3 games might be a little skewed.
 
0
Red Monster said:
the ACG review made me feel a lot better. I trust Karak’s judgement when it comes to games, and it sounds like he loves Starfield.
Click to expand...
His review is also hilarious:

"Starfield is one of the buggiest space games I've ever seen... seriously, they're everywhere, and they're massive" -> video shows giant bug monsters, his actual bug count is 8 after 30 hours

"Starfield also has a lot of issues... with religion and space-faring humans on the brink of starvation on the edges of a far-flung solar system"

"Starfield also has a lot of problems... that you solve in your space mystery van. Space gangs, pirates, interstellar thieves, missing people and heartless criminal organizations"

He knew what he was goddamn doing haha
 
I am just 2-3 hours in and I already like this so much. The physical tangibility of existing in a BGS world remains unmatched, and this one comes through on that front right away, exploration and discoveries feel very organic, and there is a lot of love for outer space as a setting here demonstrated in the absurd attention to detail you see on a lot of fronts.
 
Last edited:
This game looks incredible but the problem is the marketing which made it seem more like No Mans Sky with Elder Scrolls style quests which set unrealistic expectations... kind of like how Cyberpunk made itself appear to be a breathing open world when that was not what it ended up being in any way whatsoever.

Bethesda's engine is simply not equipped to make a seamless space exploration experience... but that's okay because Outer Worlds on steroids is awesome as well.. and that's what they should have marketed the game as... perhaps this way worked though as I'm feeling pretty good about its future popularity, sales and subs.
 
Was hoping for a game that would set a new precedent for space, a la Skyrim for open worlds. Just seems like Outer Worlds or No Man's Sky but bigger. I still feel like we haven't had a truly groundbreaking space game. A lot of them promise a ton of planets or something, which turn out to be empty, boring, or a slog to travel to. I'm waiting for the space game that just sets the new standard. Still looks awesome.
 
MeatheadSamus said:
Was hoping for a game that would set a new precedent for space, a la Skyrim for open worlds. Just seems like Outer Worlds or No Man's Sky but bigger. I still feel like we haven't had a truly groundbreaking space game.
Click to expand...
that going to be a problem then since those games do space exploration better then starfield, starfield at it's core is still a Bethesda RPG
 
Seeing lots of disappointment online. Many thought it was a surefire 90+. I guess it's like if the next 3D Zelda, Rockstar or Naughty Dog game got a 87. People would combust
 
Last edited:
amara said:
Seeing disappointed people online. A lot of people thought it was a surefire 90+. I guess it'd be like if the next 3D Zelda, Rockstar or Naughty Dog game got a 87. People would combust
Click to expand...
Because they said that this Starfield can rescue Xbox sales situation but from what I see, it's not save Xbox. Exterior environment for me is so boring, so no insensitive to explore more
 
0
I can't believe Meristation gave it a 5.8 lmao. Has it changed that much since I was a kid? I remember it giving out 9s like they were candy.
 
I think when it is all said and done there was one major failing regarding Starfield. After playing it for a few hours I'm going to trace the games reception back to one simple statement.

Todd Howard years ago said Starfield is like "Skyrim in space." Saying that set expectations to a certain degree. What he should have said is that Starfield is like "Fallout in space" and people would've been more accepting of what this game is. There is a big destination in saying something is a Skyrim-like or a Fallout-like.

Starfield so far is a great game, but it is just Fallout in space when for years we were expecting Skyrim in space based on how they were trying to sell it to us.
 
a 1000 planets was probably a tad too much. I'd rather have 10 really good ones. Still interested in the game though. Bethesda games usually do end up being very replayable and I'm sure the dev team will update this game for the next 10 years. I don't even have a Xbox or Windows PC yet so I will wait untill it gets fixed up a bit before buying a Steam PC or something.
 
0
Scrawnton said:
I think when it is all said and done there was one major failing regarding Starfield. After playing it for a few hours I'm going to trace the games reception back to one simple statement.

Todd Howard years ago said Starfield is like "Skyrim in space." Saying that set expectations to a certain degree. What he should have said is that Starfield is like "Fallout in space" and people would've been more accepting of what this game is. There is a big destination in saying something is a Skyrim-like or a Fallout-like.

Starfield so far is a great game, but it is just Fallout in space when for years we were expecting Skyrim in space based on how they were trying to sell it to us.
Click to expand...
I’ve never played Fallout.

I’m curious to know the difference between the two. Skyrim and Fallout
 
MeatheadSamus said:
Was hoping for a game that would set a new precedent for space, a la Skyrim for open worlds. Just seems like Outer Worlds or No Man's Sky but bigger. I still feel like we haven't had a truly groundbreaking space game. A lot of them promise a ton of planets or something, which turn out to be empty, boring, or a slog to travel to. I'm waiting for the space game that just sets the new standard. Still looks awesome.
Click to expand...
Will that ever be possible? I mean, just look at BotW for example. It's not planet-size, though it still has many biomes, so let's accept it as a "small planet". Are we really expecting for games to feature such size and variety several times over (ie: once per planet)? In the end, I feel like the word "planet" should just be assumed to be just a contextual term for level/location/biome. I also think that, from the players' perspective, it would be better for planets to have a very strong central theme (fire planet, ice planet, mechanical planet...), because if all planets end up having a fire region, a snowy region, an industrial sector, then they would all end up meshing and not feeling like different planets. And it would also make navigation much less fun, as it would be impossible to make a mental map of what's where when everything is almost the same. Regarding content, if all planets featured a ton of important NPCs, questlines, story points...it would be really messy and overwhelming.
 
Last edited:
DecoReturns said:
I’ve never played Fallout.

I’m curious to know the difference between the two. Skyrim and Fallout
Click to expand...
Just a quick surface level distinction. Fallout has a big open map but it's more of an isolated interior shooter and objective based with quest branches being the nest of the experience. Skyrim is a much bigger map that encourages world exploration and freedom. Fallout and Starfield are more "linear" and want to be played a specific way. Skyrim is more akin to BotW with its freedom and player choice.
 
I wonder with TES6 if Bethesda will go for depth rather than breadth. Starfield's empty planets is a pretty universal critique, seems like journalists are finally sick of the facade of gargantuan open worlds

Think at this point most would rather get a Skyrim-sized open world with 10x the depth/content vs. 1 impossibly huge open world
 
MrBones said:
I wonder with TES6 if Bethesda will go for depth rather than breadth. Starfield's empty planets is a pretty universal critique, seems like journalists are finally sick of the facade of gargantuan open worlds

Think at this point most would rather get a Skyrim-sized open world with 10x the depth/content vs. 1 impossibly huge open world
Click to expand...
Yeah, at this point I'd rather see another Kamurocho where every door hides something different or just a district filled with life like Disco Elysium did rather than a "you can go there" promise, where "there" is maybe a chest with a +2 helmet or something
 
0
Call me crazy, but I think people are finally seeing Bethesda games for what they really are? I never liked them. And with competition increasing since the launch of the witcher 3, tastes have changed improved a lot while Bethesda hasn’t.

That’s my biggest grip with GTA6. Red Dead 2 showed us that rockstar is not much focused on gameplay improvements. I hope they see what Bethesda is doing and up their game.
 
0
Theres something wrong with the brightness levels in this game. Everything looks super washed out, like there are no true black levels, just shades of grey. It honestly looks hideous in parts and I don’t know why they thought this was a good idea
 
0
You can’t do a space game that doesn’t go for the illusion of size, sorry. You can absolutely come at this from the perspective of “this is how it should have been designed” and that’s valid, but designing a Starfield that doesn’t have its size is pointless, because you don’t have a space game at that point. The size is integral to selling the illusion.
 
Ozeiyo said:
I can't believe Meristation gave it a 5.8 lmao. Has it changed that much since I was a kid? I remember it giving out 9s like they were candy.
Click to expand...
Apparently that reviewer gave Forspoken a better qualification… I wonder what was on his mind… and I wouldn’t take that review too seriously IMO.
 
ika said:
Apparently that reviewer gave Forspoken a better qualification… I wonder what was on his mind… and I wouldn’t take that review too seriously IMO.
Click to expand...

I remember the name sonystation being thrown around when I was younger :________
 
I don' really pay that much attention to scores. 80, 90 what does it matter. Remember also it's the same ign that gave alien isolation 5.9 and prey initially got a 4/10 (same reviewer) from them. Im not a huge fan of bethesda rpgs, but I like their jank, so I know what's coming and I'll have fun.
 
FeiFongWong said:
I don' really pay that much attention to scores. 80, 90 what does it matter.
Click to expand...

FeiFongWong said:
Remember also it's the same ign that gave alien isolation 5.9 and prey initially got a 4/10 (same reviewer) from them.
Click to expand...

oprah-winfrey-so-what-is-the-truth.gif
 
Right, a lot of chat about getting the main quest storyline done first and then moving onto the wider world. Who is going in on breaking with Bethesda tradition and sticking to the path here?

I'm thinking about it because, really, the MQ is just a thread of story like any of the others that pop up in their games. Nothing drastically big happened to me once I finished off the main Skyrim story, I just did all the quests that one bod had served up to me, like had happened in places like the Mages Guild.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom