• Notorious_handholder@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everything in Starfield feels like more clicking through (horribly outdated) menus and inventory screens. Between those and the loading screens, the only time the game is really fun is when you’re shooting pirates. But there are games that do that part much much better.

    This is just a summary of modern Bethesda games in a nutshell, except forgetting to mention bugs as well.

    I really don’t know what people where expecting with Starfield

      • CIWS-30@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think Microsoft can be thanked for that. They buckled down and lent their support to make sure Starfield didn’t have constant crashes and backwards flying spaceships and whatnot.

    • OscarRobin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      No it really isn’t. In all prior Bethesda games you could get from any place in the world to any other just by walking and maybe some loading screens if you’re going from/to a city or dungeon. In Starfield you have to use menus and loading screens to get from most places to most other places.

      Also, Starfield places more emphasis on amassing items due to having resources etc than the previous-worst Fallout 4, and all prior Bethesda games didn’t have resources to manage, just items.

      So no, while Starfield is very much like previous Bethesda games, many flaws and issues are exacerbated.

      • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’d like to know how many of you actually WALKED everywhere in Skyrim or Fallout, I tried it once, boring as fuck and extremely irritating when a quest took me from one side of the map to the other and back. Fast traveling is good and a majority of people that play their game use it almost exclusively where possible.

        Y’all are delusional if you think people want to play walking simulators all the time in their RPGs, it’s a very small group who plays them that way.

        • kmkz_ninja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because walking from one side of skyrims map to the other and back is TOTALLY the same as just being able to walk from Riften to Whiterun. The equivalent of which you wouldn’t be able to do in Starfield.

          • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Riften to Whiterun is like half the distance from solitude to Riften, walking between either is a chore and 99% of players wouldn’t or don’t do it.

            Tho comparing it to Starfield is sorta hilarious because Starfield is absolutely massive and even games like NMS require going into menus to jump between systems.

            Do I wish Starfield was more like NMS in that you can relatively seamless take off, fly to another planet, land, do it all over again? Yeah that’d be pretty sweet. Do I also know that the world’s in NMS are way way less interesting and detailed overall and the storyline/NPC interactions are very basic? Yes I do.

            Different strengths and different end goals for the games