I have never tried harder to enjoy a game more, but after 25 hours, I just wasn't having enough fun with it, so I bailed. I kept expecting it to get better.I'm happy for those who like it.
Put it into a bit of perspective. You put 25 hours into that game. Thats actually kind of a lot. The dead space remake (one of my favorites of all time) can be completed in less than that.
The problem with Starfield is the things NPCs asks you to do would only make sense in a medieval setting. Those "talk to [person]" quests where you travel to another planet, talk to [person], then travel back to the 1st planet, would only make sense in a future where interstellar comms somehow don't exist, but interstellar travel does.
That's part of the tech, its mentioned a number of times, you NEED a grav drive to travel faster than light so comms is light speed limited. That's why SSNN delivers its broadcasts by physical packages to the colonies via ship.
That’s the thing! There is no interstellar comms in the Starfield universe. Since Gravity drives are wormhole tech and not FTL, they don’t have the current means of projecting radiowaves through vast distances of space. My best guess is that they rely on a system similar in Halo to what the UNSC used prior to reverse engineering Forerunner tech; they’d have a fleet of messenger ships to relay information from one system to another, since inter-system communications took wayyy too long. Though, this problem in Starfield could be and should be solved way more easily by having relay drones that have individual grav drives to propel themselves in a sort of line from one system to another. Way too tedious Bethesda.
I've always been amazed how Bethesda can get so many things right while half assing so many other things. I wish we could combine the best things from Rockstar and Bethesda into one company.
@@giorgioperleka3893 I agree but I didnt' say the literal companies, just the design aspects that I enjoy from both. For example despite rdr2 being one of the best games ever made the controls are still wonky because they seem to be designed around controllers.
@@jiketagg4251 I'm going to play it probably later this year, I'm waiting to upgrade my graphics card and monitor so I can play it properly on ultra settings.
As a Bethesda fanboy, really fan-old-man, I was so hyped. 2500 hours in both Skyrim and FO4, Probably just as many in Oblivion and FO3. I wanted to love it but just couldn't. It was OK, good, but that was it for me. I played almost 500 hours finishing most of the faction quest lines and the main story but that was it. I didn't nessisarily want some big new thing, just a vast improvement, or maybe it's better to say expanding on the systems they already had. What I found disappointing was that I felt that in many ways it was a step backwards for those sytems and they had years to fine tune them. For example, outposts. Whats the purpose in Starfield other than to farm XP and cash. If they would have expanded on FO4's settlement system. Even incorperated aspects of the sim-settlement mod. Settlemnts in space, recruit others to settle there, build shops, small quests involing your settlements, etc. A place to manage, trade, and defend, i.e. given them a real purpose. Also companians. While they were better than Skyrim and FO4, not by much. There was a companion mod in FO4, Heather, that after traveling with her, getting to know her backstory, I, as a 60 something year old man irl, was fighting back tears as she very emotionally told me how the institute had killed her sister. How she watched her die and felt so helpless. I am amazed, no blown away, that a part time modder, at home, doing her own voice acting, come create a NPC companion you can connect with and truly want to get to know, empathis with and a game studio with a three trillion dollar company behind them can't even remotly come close. Finally the procedural generation. I think I cleared out five exact same 'abandoned fuel depot' with the exact same bad guys that were in the exact same locations in the buildings on five different planets one weekend. That gets really old, really fast. Give me smaller but had crafted world any time. After Starfield, if I know in the future a game is procedurally generated I probably wont buy it. It's my biggest hestitation in trying Valhiem. Sorry it's so long, a lot to get off my chest. BTW, love your guys content.
As a 1300 hour valheim player getting through the bosses and crafting what you need is challenging and fun. But what really keeps me coming back to it is the base building system. It's fun just to see what crazy awesome thing you can build next. And when you get tired of grinding for raw materials you can turn on developer commands to spawn it in.
You might need rehab for video game addiction. Imagine later in life seeing how much of your life you spent behind a screen plugged in like a zombie. You had an entire real life planet to explore and experience, and you sit in front of a screen instead. 😮
My opinion is they tried their standard formula on a setting which isnt really compatible with it, space not being a single map like in their previous games, think thats the major issue for me.
I agree on this point, exploration definitely falls flat, i like starfield, but the generation of random planets and almost no unique handmade areas outside of cities its so boring, feel like they would have been better off making it either one solar system or 2 and then you could just fly your ship around. Not to mention the planets lets say, 4-7 of them could be much more handmade, not completely of course but better and less generic
I wouldn’t even say they tried their standard formula. I feel like the Bethesda formula is about engine mechanics, but the way the world opens up to you. It’s following all those little icons that appear on the compass and getting sidetracked with quests, caves, discoveries. You can finish the opening mission in Skyrim and then set off for hours in the opposite direction and find things for hours before even going to Whiterun. Starfield just doesn’t have this. It’s loading screens to empty planets with enormous stretches of nothing that leads to a copy paste, procedurally generated cave that usually has nothing in it. Not even going to get into the writing and lack of choice and consequence in this game. Idk what Bethesda has spent the last x number of years doing.
It's not that exactly. They focused too much on quantity over quality. I recently watched a side by side comparison with FO4. Starfield is just empty. They should have just done a single Galaxy and put much more in it
@@darkatthecore9387 the quality of the game matters. We got to the point of "day one patches" that doesn't even make the game playable because gamers keep giving these companies their money for half finished games. You can enjoy whatever you like. I do enjoy games others don't, and their low opinion of them doesn't effect my enjoyment. But I'll always criticize things I think are bad, even within games I love.
I put a couple hundred hours into this game and I have thoughts. When I judge what a game means to me, one of the most important moments for me is the very end, where I accomplish everything I set out to accomplish, go to my favorite spot, put on my favorite outfit (if applicable), and hit save for the very last time (for the time being, at least). It gives me that cathartic sense of a great story reaching its end and me letting it go. At that moment, I look back on the journey that I went through. I reflect on my first impressions during the tutorial and think about how long ago that felt, even though maybe it was only a couple of weeks before. I remember all of the special moments and challenges I overcame and, if the writing was good, the growth that the characters went through. Usually if I put more than a hundred hours into a game, this moment is very special. But with Starfield, it wasn't the same. First of all, without spoiling anything, the ending gives the player an unfair dilemma. It wants you to make a certain choice, but gives you every reason not to make that choice. It basically tells you that those hundreds of hours you put into it were not enough, and in order to nab this mysterious carrot that they are dangling, you need to give even more. In that way, it feels a bit like a never-ending live service game, because there is never a feeling of completion and satisfaction. There is only a feeling that the game wants you to keep going toward this vague future reward, and it expects you to trudge through endless recycled content to get there. I think that's a big reason why so many people have given negative reviews after spending so much time playing it. They endured the excruciating commerce system, the endless loading screens, the major plot beats delivered through boring dialogue instead of on-screen action, and the exhausting traversal systems, and all they asked was for the game to reward them with a fulfilling conclusion. But that reward never came, and at some point they had to just let go of this story and let it drift out into space.
I totally agree that certain people who finish the game are negatively reviewing it in this way. The story could have been stronger. The sense of wonder was there initially, but quickly nabbed away. But i think a huge portion of people are negatively reviewing it in the first few hours of playing. I had predicted this, but people want control when playing flight sim/ space ex games. The loading screens ARE gnarly, ripping people out of the immersion. I liked starfield a lot. But i can see why people arent. Bethesda needs to ditch creation engine and move on to a more "solid state" fluid model. Then their stories can really shine.
@@tysteven6279I agree, but then they would have to spend untold money on a transition of that magnitude. And until one of their games completely flops they’ll never do so. Especially now that they’re owned by Microsoft
Agreed. I actually enjoyed the game despite it's many flaws until the end. I can endure or overlook those elements if I'm engaged with the story, and my path was enjoyable to me. However, the ending felt like it robbed me of even that. I do think there is a potential for the ending to have been executed better than it was, but as it is, ended up killing the game for me.
I watched a video on RU-vid and after completing the game numerous times, the next time you play NG+ there is a chance for encounters to be different. However, it is a small change and if you don’t notice anything different at the start of your NG+ that means you have to complete the game again and once again, there is a very small chance that the next time you play the interactions and things will be different…that’s crazy. Almost forcing the gamer to play through multiple times just to get rewarded with unique interactions.
Good for you. I'm delighted you found it in your heart to tell the world just how much you don't care about their opinion. There;s nothing more endearing than someone informing others just how little they care. You carry on enjoying what you like, and you carry on telling the world you don't care about their opinions. Shout it loud as you can. As often as you can. In the end, you might even convince yourself.
@@likskirtspleetscreen I know right, reminds me of someone deliberately walking in a pub and going round telling everyone how little they care about pubs. It's like, cool story bro. Why you here then...
For me, a big problem was repetition. Once I come across something in a game that feels repeated and endless, something happens in my brain where I lose all interest in doing that task. One of the first custom landing points I went to on a planet had a science outpost or something, and a random quest to find someone lost in a cave. Then, another planet I landed on soon after, had a quest to find someone lost in a cave… and there was a Science outpost with the exact same layout as the first. That was basically the end of my planetary exploration.
This game is made for people with dementia. By the time you see a copy and pasted outpost that you already visited hrs before on another planet, you already forgot the previous one. Perfect!
Once I saw those patterns it completely killed my interest in the game. Seriously. It just felt there was no point to anything and holding the W button for minutes to get to the quest location is not something I wanted to do anymore. Instead I started playing Cyberpunk 2077 and was hooked. Starfield is outdated and dull, and Cyberpunk is better in every single way.
the magic of bethesda games has always been setting off to complete a quest; 5 hours later you've run into a half dozen other quests, dungeons, pretty landscapes and you've completely forgotten what you had wanted to do in the first place. pretty hard to get the same feeling on a bunch of barren rocks with one thing to do on them.
That's just not true. The magic is still there, but you need to approach it differently. Don't explore planets without reason. The loop is like this: Find city/hub, explore city, get quests, do quest, return to city/hub. Repeat. You get the magic this way. The game just sucks at telling you this!
This is not how many people approach sandbox games. People want to find themselves forgetting time, forgetting where they are and wondering how they've ended up going off the beaten track. There's no point in telling people how to approach games, because sandbox games are fundamentally about choosing your own style of play. That's why you need to ensure there's a point of interest every 30-40 seconds of travel.
@@aitvaras5271 I get it. I really do, but once I started thinking of the game like Mass Effect 1 in structure it really started shining. My description might sound somewhat streamlined but you still get the classic random Bethesda events and exploration this way. It's kind of impossible to do the 30/40 second loop in this scale. I mean... Look at Star Citizen for example. It's like this as well(without loading screens lol).
I am a huge bethesda fan and a huge sci-fi fan, so despite having played through the game and only kind of enjoyed it I do still find myself really wanting to play the game. But then I log on and two things in particular bother me. First, the loading screens. I know it's been talked about, but I just can't with the loading screens. It just makes the whole universe feel so small and I end up feeling like 60% of my playtime is sitting there watching the screen do its thing. Second, there's literally just not enough to do. I've already done all the faction quests and the main quest and a bunch of side quests and now there's just radiant quests from the mission board. I've basically not touched 80% of the planets and I've done everything there is to do in the game. So now when I log on occasionally, I find myself teleporting from planet to planet looking for something interesting to do only to realize I've spent the last 10 minutes watching loading screens and I shut the game off.
Disappointment. Didn't hold my attention like Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 4. I was married to those. This felt boring, found myself on my phone in between the barrage of loading screens having to bounce the cosmos.
I think what we're seeing, in real time, is developers finally learning that bigger is not always better. A limited scope map packed full of content will always be a better game and bring people back more than an infinite universe with nothing going on. Their OWN crowning achievement, Skyrim, is a perfect example of this.
A nice sentiment but I don’t see that as the takeaway in this case. Skyrim was enormous for its time. 2023 GOTY is by far the biggest game I have ever seen. 2022 GOTY was also an open world RPG.
About the modding. I saw some RU-vid video about it, something about the main problem now is the origin of the game world is not the player, the game will crash if the player travel too far away. Hence the loading screen. Each loading screen change the origin of the game world. But if people want to mod it, the best option is to fix the origin of the world to the player character. However, since the origin of the game world is where the game build on, it is not an easy fix. Some had said it is easier to make a whole new game than to change the origin of the game world.
I think the core issue is deeper and more depressing: Bethesda simply doesn't know anymore how to replicate Skyrim's quality level of exploration and adventure. Their last indisputable success was over 10 years ago, but Fallout 4 clearly had some questionable decisions. So if anything, I am more concerted about the present and the future of BGS itself, rather than Starfield's future.
I've enjoyed this game quite a bit, I put 300 hours in this game and I still can spend plenty more. I haven't even scratched the new game + option yet.
One of the main issues with Starfield is the lack of interesting wandering. You can wander around the major settlements, and that is actually pretty good. But, other than that, there's not much more to find out there on the planets and in space.
i wonder what the right way to do a space game like this is. How do you offer the player a universe of wonder and intrigues and have many of those planets be unique experiences worth combing through. may require AI to flesh out every planet with interesting idiosyncracies. one other way a team could do it is if their entire mission was to release a game about space and promise lifetime updates to planets n such. i dunno
@@NandosN0Wwhat are you even trying to say here? Do you think OP was under the impression that you're supposed to be able to wander around but there's some huge bug that makes that impossible?
There’s just no sense of “Oh. What’s that over there?” Which is what made Skyrim and Fallout so special to me. You have to actively choose to go everywhere in Starfield and that sucks
Maybe I need to try to put more time into the game, but I totally disagree that it feels like a Bethesda game. If it felt like “just another Bethesda game,” that would be such an upgrade to this game.
I feel like I kind of hit a plateau in my excitement at 15 or so hours. I never really felt myself getting more drawn in like I did with Skyrim. I feel like the world building needed to bake for a while longer.
I've been far more lenient with Starfield than most people. I've been a Bethesda fan since Morrowind, so the gameplay loop of exploration, discovery and loot is right up my alley. The best thing about Bethesda games for me has always been the things you could do outside of the story. Just taking a stroll in any random direction through the environment that they created and finding an amazing bit of environmental storytelling or an unmarked dungeon with some incredible theme to it. Of the supposedly over a thousand planets to explore in Starfield a large percentage of them are gas giants you can't even land on, multiple moons that you couldn't tell the difference between, and rehashed locations to visit on every planet, duplicated down to even the items inside lockers. After the 40 or 50 hour mark there just doesn't seem to be anything left to see or new to explore. I would have taken four highly detailed explorable planets over a thousand cookie cutter boring uninteresting planets. I hope this isn't indicative of what we will see in Elder Scrolls 6.
Seriously, put all that effort into three or four planets and they can still call it their precious space exploration game but then at least the exploration part would actually feel like exploring and not the equivalent of pulling out your phone again to look at the time because you forgot to look at the time when you pulled it out previously to check said time. It becomes a big circle of I knew that already why'd I look again 🤦
Yeah, Blows my mind when I see articles pop up about people playing for 100-200+ hours or even more.. They must be really bored or have no other games.. or maybe havn't played any games since the last fallout or something.. I dunno but I got bored pretty quick and then there was too many other games to bother trying it again... maybe one day. Glad I played on Gamepass!
Totally disagree, but not trying to change your opinion which you're more than entitled to. Me and my wife both have about 200-300hrs each. We'd talk about all the issues and the parts we loved. I think so much of this game just got shoved into a negative review spiral. I see so many good things in the game that warrant its price and so many people ignore it. It has glaring flaws which would never put it at my top Bethesda titles. But the idea that people are rating it worse than FO76 is proof of my indignation to the social influence Starfield received.
@@YarrumDrabhtor chill out Azmon light, I took my stand on 76 by absolutely refusing to play it. I hate the games as a service model and I felt 76 was a slap in the face of long time Fallout fans and still do. By lenient I mean I gave it about 100 hours before I got so bored with it I had to move on to something else. I play it on Game Pass thankfully because having done so I'm glad I didn't spend full price on it and I never will.
Starfield looks like a complete joke next to BG3. It's hilarious that Larian was afraid that Starfield might affect their revenue and pushed their release date up in order to avoid competing with it. Starfield is one of the laziest and and dullest games released in the last 5 years where BG3 is a masterpiece.
@@cinifiend It didn't help Phantom Liberty was released weeks after too. It opened many people's eyes how good the interaction was in CP2077. The communication between the NPC and you felt organic. I'm with you on how dull everything felt with Starfield.
I watched a video on RU-vid and after completing the game numerous times, the next time you play NG+ there is a chance for encounters to be different. However, it is a small change and if you don’t notice anything different at the start of your NG+ that means you have to complete the game again and once again, there is a very small chance that the next time you play the interactions and things will be different…that’s crazy. Almost forcing the gamer to play through multiple times just to get rewarded with unique interactions.
To me, this game felt like driving down a long highway, like you're somewhat concentrating on driving, but otherwise you're not engaged at all. My brain just went into autopilot and my memories of this game are just kind of a hazy blur.
for me it felt like when you get to the end of a playthrough in Skyrim or fallout 4 and you just have a couple of quests left in you journal so you just fast travel around to knock them off the list, only in starfield that's the whole game. you don't even get unique locations to explore or any world building lore stuff like a skeleton positions in a way to tell a story.
I remember playing The Outer Worlds and being enthralled. Arguably Starfield was bigger, newer (not that newer is better), and a little more content rich, but it was just not as fun. I think like Jake said, it was just ok.
@chrisdakers3688 I played outer worlds, really enjoyed it and expected Starfield to be Bethesda's version of something similar and it kinda was, time manipulation being the first power you get in both games and being the captain of your own spaceship with a modifiable crew. I don't put any over the other (still need to play more of both) but both are good.
@@DevlVergilCompared to Starfield it was leagues better, the story, gameplay, companions, and worlds. The only thing Starfield beats them in is Space Combat and Ship Building (honestly the best feature of the game) Even the rpg elements are more visible in Outer Worlds than Starfield. They should had just given Obsidian the staff and budget of Starfield and we would have gotten a game of the year instead of a meh space game
I was very excited about this game when it was announced. As a self-admitted Skyrim and Fallout addict, I was determined to play this game... fully. In fact, as I only own a PS5 in the current generation of consoles, I was even planning on buying an Xbox Series system JUST to play Starfield. That has changed a bit since its release and subsequent reviews. I still think it looks cool, and I want to play it, but I may wait to see if it makes its way to Sony. That could be a VERY long wait (if ever), but I'm not sure buying an entirely new system for a single game makes sense, especially since I concentrate on PS as my main gaming experience. We'll see.
if you use geforce now + gamepass you could play the game for very cheap compared to a new system. thats what i did, cost me bout 30 dollars. and honestly its not worth it. i am also a skyrim and fallout addict.
I felt like the city and towns didn’t feel lived in. The npcs didn’t all have a home they went to and I could follow around and learn about them like Skyrim or oblivion. I think it missed that Bethesda charm.
Bethesda tried aiming to be large in scale like other open world games but fell short since their game engine is still too inept for this kinda stuff. CDPR easily rendered an entire living breathing city with thousands of NPCs shown at once and meanwhile Bethesda's engine almost explodes merely trying to render a city 1/20th a fraction of Night City's size that doesnt even have vehicles in it.
@@ZX235w3 exactly. The engine can do immersive things given its limitations. But I’m ok with the limitations. But don’t force me to deal with its limitations if that makes sense. Star field was just a constant reminder that this engine wasn’t made for this game. Which is fine they can do so much in the engine and impress like they have before. But we want to be apart of a world where the engine thrives. Not where it’s constantly struggling.
I hit a game breaking bug during Sam's companion mission. I just checked after 3 months, and that bug has still never been fixed, let alone addressed by bethesda. Locking companions to you during their buggy missions while simultaneously requiring no companions with you to progress the main story was a really bad decision.
Apparently, if you already encountered a quest bug on your playthrough, you're stuck with it unless you load an old save from before the bug, or start a new character. The patches can't retroactively undo the bugs already found by the player. Massive load of horse shit, methinks. Lazy design.
I understand that it's a bit of a bummer to have a bug halt all of your progress for the solo main mission, but that's not boring! When people get married, they also commit to being together forever. Most of them certainly don't find it boring.
@@laner.845 patches can do that, since it was done in other games. This is a really lazy excuses. Also I am a Software Developer my self and I just hate, when people say something is not possible, that is easy.
My first time playing skyrim was with the anniversary edition I ran into gamebreaking glitches upon reaching alduin he never appeared not even reloading save file fixed it mind you this is not the original version of skyrim Bethesda re released skyrim without fixing it
@@pepijnvandeweerd2089 But it is boring because you end up spending way too much time trying to get around or troubleshoot the bug instead of continuing to play. And having to repeat what you just spent hours doing because of a bug that breaks the save game is not fun, it is annoying and boring. Todd should have been put out to pasture after the nightmare that was 76. He and his ideas are about a decade and 1/2 behind the times at this point.
Man, honestly I really love this game when it comes down to it. I'm sad to say that it was ultimately the lack of optimization that stopped me from finishing this game. I, along with many others, just don't have the means to own a top of the line beefy PC, and it really sucks that this game is kind of locked behind this sort of thing. The loading screens suck, but man I would've been able to look past that and pretty much everything else people complain about if I could just play this game smoothly. I know I'll come back to it and love every minute of it once I can spare a couple grand for a new rig. For now, cyberpunk holds my heart. Thanks, Gameranx, for yet another dope and honest video.
no mans sky is way better and i played statfield and all of Bethesda's other RPG games. this game is by far the worst fuckin idea yet. do you like playing loading screen sim?@@troyknights3342
The best way I’ve ever heard Skyrim described was “wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle” I feel like starfield is that concept, taken to its logical conclusion. Add onto that the fact that it was released in one of gamings most ridiculously stacked years in recent memory and a lot of the discourse around it makes sense
For a "space simulator" in 2023 the amount of loadings and not be able to fly off the planet were a deal breaker for me. If the quests/npcs were at least good... but it's all a mess
@@StygianIkazuchibut the rpg element is even extremely restrictive. You don't really get to make real decisions in the quests, you kind of have a bunch of linear stories that are cobbled together. I found myself being frustrated at the lack of options in completing quest lines
At least in NMS you can actually land on the Planets yourself if anything more Space Games should be seamless like that not a loading screen to land or enter your ship seriously Bethesda is so outdated it hurts.
Going on three months now waiting on game breaking bugs to be fixed. The resref bug and the corrupt save bug, where if you play the game too long without initiating ng+, your save gets unrepairably trashed.
For me its the way Bethesda treated their own fans after it was released and then effectively calling many people poor because they csnt optimise. Not taking accountability is such a loser move.
It's the new thing to do. If you launch a product and it fails, you blame and insult customers. Disney, Marvel, and Lucasfilm have been doing this the past decade and look at where they are now.
I started playing Bethesda games with Oblivion and have played all of them since. I was so excited for Starfield as I felt it was going to be a refreshing story that would give the unique feeling of excitement and nostalgia that only amazing games can give you (nostalgia - feeling like a kid on Christmas with a new toy. The feeling we don’t get as adults very often). For some reason the exploration, planets and travel felt like the biggest betrayal… What’s there to explore? What’s there to enjoy outside of the streamlined experience / story (if you enjoy that)? The lackluster exploration experience is what made my rose tinted classes come off and made me realize that this game is truly a “copy-paste” of the “Bethesda formula”. I won’t say the game broke my heart, I think my expectations and hopes did. “Their most disappointing” I think that’s accurate in that there were expectations. Their worst? Maybe, who knows. I was hoping and I guess expecting this game to reignite my love for gaming and for a good story. It was just one of those experiences that as an adult can add to the “it is what it is”. As someone who has been losing interest and that true enjoyment with gaming over the last couple of years, this one hurt more than a usual disappointment.
For me, this is the best thing since RDR2. It took getting to a few temples, maxing a few skills, getting to "A High Price to Pay" and getting past 200K space caps to have fun but im having a great time man.
I had high but reasonable expectations for the game, and I have to say; while I liked it, I never felt wanting more when I turned it off at night. No "One more mission/side quest and I'll go to sleep". It was "alright". I never ended up finishing it but I did enjoy my 40ish hours in the game.
On the same boat. A handful of notable moments like visiting neon, paradisio, and love the shipbuilding, it is quite well put together for such a complex mechanic. But its no skyrim, or fallout. I dont want to look for mods so i can breathe new life to the game. I just want to see what happens upon ending the story and leave for good
If a game doesn't grip me within 10 hours of playing I'm pretty much over it. Starfield didn't make the cut for me. I have too much going on to waste time on bad games when there are better ones out there.
It's a decent game but they really missed out. They concentrated too much on vastness and much less on content. I'd rather have 100 planets with a lot to do than 1000 planets with cookie cutter settlements. Even the loot is mirrored in different locations...
I had fun with it. I think I checked out of the story when they revealed who the Starborn were under the mask because I cared so little about them. But the exploring and quests etc were fun. I still play more from time to time but I want to cross the Unity a few more times before settling down and really focusing on resources and building a base
I uninstalled Starfield to make some space and realized I’ll probably never install it again, just because it’s too hard to stay engaged with for extended periods. Hope we get some crazy mods/dlc/fixes to turn it around
@@Beehive151skyrim was the last game of theirs people loved, yes there was some hate but overall people loved it, fallout 4 was a bit more divided (it’s fun but mid) and ofc 76(fun now but fuck me) The update they teased for feb does give me some hope they’ll actually fix the game
It's definitely their biggest disappointment, A lot of people made excuses that 76 wasn't made by the main team but Starfield was and their is no excuse this time
I bought into the good reviews and general popular attitude towards it and I dropped $35 to get it early on gamepass. It was a ginormous disappointment to me. I started out thinking it was pretty good but at this point I would just call it bad, I don't think it even deserves a "mediocre"
I was definitely disappointed, mostly because of the exploration. I don’t really care about the quests because Bethesda is mediocre on quest most of the time but the exploration has always been top tier with environmental lore and Starfield doesn’t really have any of that
I expected fallout in space, that's what I got. I love the game, its not phenomenal, but it's very enjoyable. I may not play it that much anymore after getting all the achievements, but am very much looking forward to dlc in the future.
No. I got exactly what I wanted from it. Fun ship building, improved gunplay, fantastic characters and companions, tons of replability, a focus on a main story (that I consider top notch), and room for plenty of expansion going forward. This game feels extremely similar to Daggerfall. It set the ground work for what’s to come. In time, it’ll be remembered as a classic. Maybe a little too big for it’s own good, with too much procedural generation, but that’s my only complaint. Wheneve a sequel does drop, (probably 30 years from now, given the pace Bethesda is on) I think it’s going to be a masterpiece.
@@user-ir5xc8je2e absolutely missed the position, completely overlooked the point, and STILL made a nonsensical reply. You’re certainly the biggest disappointment to your parents…
To me Starfield was a beautiful lie. Much like it's ingame food items gloriously cursed. It promised travel by spaceship. What we got was travel by cut scene. And the more and more you dissected it the more and more you realized where ever you went in game there was always some random human outpost just sitting 30 feet away from your target and you cant help but wonder. What was going through those npc's heads. Aside from that featureless glazed look that all the npc's seem to have. "Yeah! There's a big glowing structure just outside our front door lets go explore it and claim a first!" "Or we could wait for some random explorer to stop by and claim the glory for themselves. On top of that there's a random criminal element roaming the galaxy which they mostly claim as UC Space with the exception of House Va'run and the UC appears to be on the backend with the Crimson Fleet. And don't even get me started on the main story line trying to rip itself from Skyrims cold Sort of kind of dead corpse cause keeps getting revamped every year with a new console platform. Truth be told it all felt like Fallout 3 or 76 all over again with the same mechanics same game engine only mildly updated to make DLSS useless from the start.And loading screens every where you went. It got me to thinking. How to classify the United Colonies as a ruling party. And the only conclusion that I could come to was it was a failed state., Much like Bethesda and Todd Howards reputation.
The Definition of a failed state from Websters Dictionary A state whose political or economic system has become so weak that the government is no longer in control. While admittedly it's not the worst entry Bethesda's put out recently there's aspects of the game I like most notably fiddling with Starship creator. And some of the voice acting talent was top notch. Elias Toufexis for example always wondered where he went to after Mechwarrior 5. All in All I really am starting to hate pushed release dates. Should make a tag "It'll be ready when it's Ready." And give the company enough time to put out a solid project. Ohhh. R.W.I.R. I like that one slap it on a T-shirt.
It’s the same thing over and over. As soon as you engage in a conversation and that camera goes into Bethesda mode you already feel like you’re playing a game you’ve played over and over and over. Most games that are succeeding have mystery shrouded around them and this has none. Rockstar improve their formula every time to such a degree that they can get away with it.
It is an okay game. It didn't replicate those feelings I got from playing Oblivion, Skyrim, or Fallout 3 for the first time and that's unfortunate, but maybe it's because I've seen this game one too many times. It has also been extremely difficult going from Cyberpunk (I started after the new patches) to this game. Cyberpunk just feels like it has so much more life to its story, NPC, environments, and I feel so much more satisfaction from a fight encounter in CP than I do in Starfield. I'm very interested in the main story, the possible endings, the relationship sidequests, and just the world of Night City in general. I'm about to finally beat Phantom Liberty and then I'll give Starfield more time, maybe with more hours played and actually getting to New Game+ I'll enjoy it a little more.
Cyberpunk is the trigger flashpoint in revealing Bethesda's outdatedness when it comes to tech. No matter what Bethesda tries, they cant deny CDPR is their closest competitor in the gaming landscape today. And if Bethesda refuses to move along and innovate in their tech, they're not gonna last much longer. I hope Rockstar also joins into the medieval fantasy space to finally kick Bethesda out. CDPR is even moving to the even more advanced UE5 now whereas Bethesda is still gonna stick with their Gamebryo engine for TES6. I dont see how this can turn out good for them. The Gamebryo is seriously seriously lagging behind in terms of open world design. The engine simply cant re-create large breathing realistic cities like other games can and as you've seen, not even empty planets without loading screens. Another problem with Gamebryo is the extremely shitty character animations. That'd be acceptable 10 years ago but Bethesda's kind of low quality character animations is getting really out-of-touch in 2023.
Cyberpunk 2077 is an action fps with RPG elements in an open world. It is more appropriate to compare this game with Far Cry, Crysis, GTA. Starfield is an open world sandbox. And Bethesda's games have no analogs. There are CRPGs like Planescape Torment, Arcanum, Baldur's Gate, Wasteland, Pathfinder, Divinity. And there are Action RPGs like Mass Effect, Dragon Age, The Witcher and so on. But there are no games like Bethesda. Where you could enter any room in the game, where there are hundreds of unique NPCs in the world of the game, all objects around the world kept their position, where all things had their own physics, collision.
@@swift2873 Plenty of games have as many or more significant NPCs in the world? Some of the stuff you said it true but youre just describing a good tech demo. Also there are less games like the OG ME trilogy then there are games like TES. Just because you have a narrow view of gaming doesnt make it true. Weirdos man
@@swift2873 No it's not? Games like Far Cry and Crysis are linear and absoutely not RPGs since you dont make any story choices. GTA whilst being open world, isn't classified as an RPG since the missions are also extremely linear and there's practically no choices nor character customisation except for the ending. "But there are no games like Bethesda." Yes, there are. A plenty. Bethesda has lost their uniqueness completely. "Where you could enter any room in the game," You can enter every room in RDR2 too. And you can NOT enter every room anymore in Starfield cities. "where there are hundreds of unique NPCs in the world of the game" You mean all those generic-looking NPCs giving you generic fetch quests and with the same generic idle animations? Pretty sure BD3 has like 10x more dialogue lines than Starfield NPCs do. "all objects around the world kept their position, where all things had their own physics, collision." Go try shooting a glass cup in Starfield and watch it bounce around and not even break. That's the kind of physics you're impressed by? lol. This isn't 2011 anymore. In CP2077 you can shoot glass cups and they'll not only fly away but break as well. You can destroy glass windows in specific portions. You can even see pillars you take cover behind blown away by enemy nades. Meanwhile go toss a grenade in your Starfield toilet and watch the toilet rolls just bounce around like hard rocks.
It’s my favorite space game to date. I’ve played NMS and elite for hundreds of hours. Only real issue is they made fast travel too easy which bypasses the game and the immersion. It’s a great game to me. I love it.
I played it for a good 70 hours, which for any other game would be plenty. But I have little desire to go back to it. Skyrim and Fallout 4 are games I've poured hundreds and hundreds of hours into over the course of several years because I always loved going back to them. Starfield doesn't feel the same; the lack of a hand-crafted interconnected world really hurts it for me. It certainly wasn't a bad game...just not one with the same kind of staying power.
I played it up to half way point. Never replaying it. Not at least without some major overhauls... most likely fixed by modders than Bethesda. Because Bethesda can't seem to ever fix most of their issues ever since Morrowind. I was always okay dealing with some jank, because the core of it was fun. Skyrim probably being the peak everywhere I turned, there was something to look at and I could do it without dealing too much with the annoying aspects like loading. Unfortunately Starfield put those limitations right in the forefront and unfortunately did not benefit of the "I want to explore everywhere I look" part of it. What probably hurt Bethesda the most was the gaslighting tone deaf responses to valid criticism. "Not having fun? That's because you're playing it wrong! Astronauts went to the moon and you can't say they were bored".
I would have appreciated if the game took a significantly smaller scope (say 25%) and focused on flushing more personality into that world. I explored the 4-5 major settlements very early on in the game. I was excited at the notion of discovering more of these settlements spread through the rest of the planet systems. I was disappointed that outside of a very few outlier settlements like Red Mile or Paradisio, 99% of the planet exploration involves the exact same bases/encampments/caves randomly populated on them.
I found it very enjoyable, and I loved piloting my huge ship around in space. The only bad thing was the bug that halted my progress in the main Constellation story. Unfortunately, I can't finish it after over 100 hours. I hope they fix that soon.
I wasn't interested in Starfield until I randomly wanted to play a space game about the time it launched. Then it had me playing every night until 2-4 am and going to work exhausted because I just couldn't stop playing it. My current thought is that Bethesda took an extra year to release a game that wasn't just broken and would provide a framework for more to come. I put the game down after 230 hours because I didn't want to get burned out. This is a game I want to enjoy for a very long time.
Hey Jake and everyone. Here I am, one of those weirdos who doesn't usually bother with any online discussions. Forums having died is a big one for me as to why. Discord is too messy, so's Reddit, and yet here I am to talk about Starfield. Likely the one and only time. Surprised that my number is so high too, apparently I have put in 375 hours into Starfield at this point. I am less than 10 levels away from getting my last achievement. Is it a little boring? Yes and I still enjoy playing. I wouldn't go so far as to say I love it, but 375 hours is a lot of time in one game. Love, love, loved Fallout, so I suppose I love Bethesda style games, but I was hoping for more. Different engine would have been nice, less load screens would have been preferable, and changes to space combat too. Even still, there's a ton of game, with story I really enjoy and the new game+ is the shit. Anywho, back to never speaking online and playing many other games, it isn't just Starfield for me. I'm just too old to bother with online discourse.
I’m also at “I like it but don’t love it”. That being said, a really good DLC with a few optimizations (read less loading screen) and it could get to “I love this game”
Definitely one of my nitpicks too. The only reason I havnt hopped on the strafield-fun train fully, is just because of the lackof radio and the loading screens (If red deaddid it you can do it Todd)
I've said this elsewhere. I enjoyed the game, I found it weirdly relaxing. It was far from perfect, don't get me wrong, but it seemed about on par with the majority of Bethesda games to me.
I’ve been waiting to jump on this game because I wanted to give Bethesda a chance to bake it longer. It might be time to give it some attention. CP2077 was amazing (after the Phantom Liberty update) and although I don’t want this becoming a habit for big studios, at least with digital release the bigger studios have the money to fix the major issues.
I feel like the expectations around the game were a bit too much. Bethesda, while a successful and influential studio, haven't really changed their formula for a very VERY long time. Same gameplay, same loop, same story-telling style, etc. Which isn't a bad thing necessarily. Don't fix something that isn't broken yk. But at the same time eventually people are going to see flaws in that formula and I feel like that might be a factor to why things turned out the way they did.
I’d say they changed their formula in the wrong way (more procedure generation, expanded (forced) fast travel, bigger but not better game areas) and lost the magic of the journey from place to place
Yeah the more I analyze some of the complaints it feels like a lot of expectations were a bit too unrealistic. I’m not saying Starfield doesn’t have any flaws. However it feels like people didn’t fully understand that the creation engine had limits. In other words we’re not gonna get a combination of mass effect and no man’s sky. It was going to be an outer worlds/Fallout 4 experience with some spaceship gameplay. That is what I expected from the beginning.
@@Steel-101it shouldn’t be people jobs to know what the engine is capable of. In addition, BGS had Microsoft behind their back and this is what they came up with. Also, the marketing was intentionally vague.
For me as someone who is a big fan of starfield, they really focussed in marketing about it being a space exploration game. But it never really feels like you're exploring space. Yeah you can dogfight in 0G and make a spaceship. But all of the "exploration" is in a sub menu. You don't just happen upon planets of moons. You have to deliberately go to planets you click on. That mixed with the severe amount of loading screens (I know, dead horse) but honestly imagine if ES6 comes out and you have to go through a loading screen for every little shack you come across. You also gotta take into consideration games like no mans sky and star citizen had to make entire game engines from scratch specifically for what they wanted. Bethesda decided to just patch the one they're currently using so it might literally be impossible to do some things.
I think you are 100 right i dont think the game engine can actually do what no mans does cuz the creation engine is a bunch of cells stitched together thats why the other games are great cuz that hand made each cell but with space that would not work at all ever
The updated Cyberpunk made me realize I don’t need Bethesda anymore… I re bought Fallout 4, and barely made it a half hour. This kinda game just doesn’t work for me anymore
Starfield at least recaptured a bunch of people on the ropes of RPG back into the genre regardsless of how empty it truly is. Their biggest disappointment IMO is that in nearly fifty years their lore into Fallout barely goes outside of North America. Their apololypse has world war, nukes, an experimental genetic virus, all the while set in a butterfly effect past, yet the whole IP is treated like an afterthought.
I ain’t play the game but not being able to fly you’re ship on planet seems like the biggest missed opportunity of a lifetime. I honestly wish more space games did it. Jedi survivor would’ve been amazing with that or even a bike like shown in outlaws.
It was Fallout in space. I think the biggest issue for me was that Starfield dropped right as Cyberpunk 2077 was fully hitting its stride. CDPR tried something new going first person and it had its issues of course but the environment and characters and gameplay were so inviting it made you want to come back. It was fresh. Starfield released at around the same time and it was more of the same. I do think they messed up not making the side characters not as interesting and very samey and I got the feeling that coming back to play as a bad character wouldn't be rewarding because the game didn't seem to want me to do that. I beat it and felt the drive to do new game + was gone. I think it was Bethesdas chance to do something interesting and new and they just stuck with Space Fallout. That's fine but it's not innovative or great. It's more safe than anything else.
Feels like a massive disservice to Cyberpunk talking about it in the same breath as Starfield... "more of the same" comment is very confusing to me too tbh?
I have to say, that this was probably one of the most balanced and objective reviews that I have seen to date of Starfield. I’m glad that you guys are able to see it from both sides and present both arguments.
Pandering to fans of the game doesn’t help the game or the industry. This flip flop middle ground position is basically just saying “I have no opinion and my ideas are irrelevant, im just going to regurgitate what’s already been said” so how is that constructive at all? This video actually sucks and I have nothing against gameranx in the slightest.
@@PaulBlartsMallclearly you haven't watched the video when the guy said Starfield is very divisive: because it is. Because either way, Bethesda's game design isn't up to most people's tastes anymore. It's like I'm going to play Squad and expect a call of duty then cry on the internet for having expected a call of duty...
As someone who put 250+ hours after the launch in the game, I feel empty. Half if that time was spent on doing the NG+ loop till max power levels(had to finish at NG11+ cuz of bugs in one of the runs in which the temple didnt generate and I noticed way too later). I thought once I became OP, I will engage with things which I did in the last run I played, I did every quest there was to do. The gameplay is fun but at the same time very empty. I feel like they wanted us to have the empty feeling after you max out because that would probably what it would feel like to be a God. It's a good philosophical dilemma but sucks in game because there is nothing to engage in outside of main quests. You truly can't be evil, you are punished heavily for it in real annoying ways. You truly can't be good because you left your own universe and are a impostor in this one taking the place of a dead person. Why build ships when there is no challenge for it? A semi decent ship coasts you across all enemies. Why make outposts unless you want to be filthy rich without any means to spend it. What good is money for a God who can obliterate anyone in a blink of an eye? In the end I left feeling empty when I last put down the game. It's not a bad game but it definitely is empty and makes you as well.
The bugs and lack of remedies are what killed it for me. I could not build outposts after level 80 or so (and I had saved that feature for last to try, other than a few resource outposts I made early...) I NG+-ed 3 times hoping that would fix it. Starting over seems not worth it.
I’m a casual gamer nowadays, but grown up with Bethesda games, amongst other classic Triple A titles, like AC, Batman Arkham, FIFA, and COD, but only ever come back to Bethesda after all these years. I’m probably in a minority where I genuinely enjoyed Starfield and like the sandbox style blended with the RPG aspects of your archetypical Bethesda game. Think Minecraft, meets Skyrim, but in space! For me, the casual gamer, that works and is more than enough for me .
Bethesda die hard here. Starfield was my most anticipated for 2023. I played it for one week, completed tons of side quests and did the main quest. it sucks so bad.
Yes, I was very disappointed with the outcome of the game and I’m a big fan of BGS.I finally decided to try out the game and I just felt like I was forcing myself to play it which is not a good sign. I’ve also tried multiple times to go back to it and I just lost interest. The loading screens, 30 fps, and bugs was some of the major reasons why I stop playing the game.
For me I really enjoyed the story. But I didn’t feel motivated to really explore like in the other series. It felt empty with nothing to do but scan stuff. So once it felt that way to me I quit going outta my way and just focused on the main story. Haven’t played since. Hoping they do a NMS like thing and improve it. And of course the creation kit to release so the god modders can do their thing. Can’t wait to see what they come up with.
I think the ai generated responses from Bethesda should’ve been highlighted more because it shows they have no interest in improving the game and that they were just hoping modders would do it again like they did for Skyrim.
Absolutely it was. Dropped it quick after a month of playing. I remember Skyrim gripping me instantly and I played that shit till there was absolutely nothing else to do. Didn’t get that same feeling with Starfield. Very very very boring. Traversing lifeless planets can only be so much fun.
@@Certified_souls_player I couldn’t even finish the main story and trust me I really tried to get into it on stream when it came out but it’s barley mid
@@Certified_souls_player It’s a “realistic universe”, meaning that only like 10 planets actually have any use and the rest are just there for outpost resources. The issue is that there are no vehicles so you’ll just walk/run across a planet
Same for me, along with Fallout 4. I've played a ton of Fallout 4 and Skyrim, and I was so excited to play Starfield. Few hours into the game, and I was bored to tears and sadness.
@Certified_souls_player main story is badly written and new game plus just barely changes 1 tiny faction. Literally everything else in a new universe is the same. Bethesda style exploration is just not there. I wish it was. I love replaying fallout 4 and skyrim for that reason. Also companions are worse than fallout 4
I played the game for like 60 hours or so and well. I think it has a good base to build on. There’s just a lot of fundamental design decisions that I feel like just don’t really work in this game. 100s of loading screens to get anywhere in a modern game is just kind of ridiculous and really takes you out of the experience. It doesn’t really feel like a cohesive world whenever every five seconds it feels like there’s a new loading screen that is also five seconds long. The procedure generation itself I don’t think is the problem, but the problem is how little options there feels like for it to generate. The jokes, if you seen one cave you’ve seen all the caves feels very accurate, whereas like Skyrim, it always felt like you were finding something new and interesting. Even if a lot of caves, maybe had similar layouts. They still felt unique enough that each one was interesting. Honestly I really don’t even explore planets towards the end when I stop playing because it really did feel like I’ve already seen all this stuff before. The guns are all right, but it doesn’t feel like there’s a lot of cool unique options with like cool effects or special abilities kind of like in Skyrim, where you can find lots of unique weapons with unique effects on them. And finally, I think a big issue with the game is how Bethesda themselves saw it. Howard has made comments “ well when the astronauts went to space and there was nothing there they weren’t bored they thought it was awesome” or something to that extent but the difference is they actually doing the thing themselves. Like if I was actually going to a moon even though there was nothing on it I’m sure I would find that. Absolutely awesome but I’m playing a video game. You know it’s just a game and they’re being nothing there because that’s realistic that’s not really that fun even if it is realistic. I honestly think if they had just shorten the amount of planets down to maybe like 30 or 50 planets and they had a bigger role and actually crafting each of these planets the game would just be that much better. There may be like 1000 planets but nobody wants to explore all of them because so many of them are dead and lifeless and boring and they’re not fun to explore. there comes a point where realism hinders your games enjoyment and maybe you should pull back on the realism.
I put 195 hours into Starfield before deciding i was done with it until some patches & DLC rolls through. It was fun, addictive, but also bland and had many instances of "one step forward, two steps back" game design. The space travel, if you can call it that, is far too fragmented for me to immerse myself in the game like I did with Fallout or TES. And even if space travel was close to seamless (or just seamed, but very cleverly disguised behind transitions that don't break immersion), they focused on quantity over quality when it comes to planets & activities. There is a ridiculous increase in randomly generated, generic encounters. It's not just the radiant quests that would push you to interact with the world and create your own stories, like the endless quests in Skyrim. It's other types of encounters, recycled facilities and caves that just vastly outnumber the amount of unique content in the game. The unique content itself just isn't that interesting either. There's one or two faction storylines that are cool. But even those are wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle. The Crimson Fleet especially. They're all written like saturday morning cartoon villains. The game's entire universe is very sterilized and lacks any grit, charm or identity. It doesn't help that i put Baldur's Gate 3 on hold to dump a couple hundred hours into this game. So the sheer quality and creativity of the writing was in INSANELY stark contrast. Starfield is *fine* as your brainless, mainstream action RPG with no real role playing or consequence. But I wanted it to be more. Especially after Bethesda's been repeatedly shown up by more complex RPG games made by studios like CDPR, Obsidian and Larian. I liked the game. I'd have to be pretty insane to have played almost 200 hours of a game I hated. I just didn't think it was anything truly special, nor do I think I'll remember over 90% of what I did in it a year from now. And that's a shame. Because Bethesda, while not always delivering the most complex or interesting writing & roleplaying elements, at least used to be able to provide memorable, immersive worlds for you to inhabit. Starfield simply doesn't have that, and I hope Beth's post-launch support can at least improve it all by a little bit.
It's such a strange game, I enjoy the faction story lines and the main story is pretty good after the initial...lazy? Writing of "heres a thing, here are some bad guys, oh look, here is a ship for you" . The combat is good enough to be quite fun. The main downside for me is the exploration, the Skyrim and Fallout games have always been so much fun to explore round, find fun little side quests and random events, weird stuff going on etc. Starfield feels too big and too empty, you land on a planet and try to explore to find very little of interest. Also, I don't know about anyone else, but Fallout 4 brain kicked in and I collected all sorts of random junk thinking "ahhh, crafting items" to find there's no scrap system and it's just...stuff...which seems like a backwards step to me. It's a decent game, but it is full of disappointing issues that really hurt it.
Hahaha, absolutely! Fallout 4 deeply engrained in us....must. pick. up. EVERYthing....Very disappointing to find it's just a load of useless junk in Starfield.
After quite a lot of hours my biggest complaint is that I can only save 50 pictures and the fact that you have to fly around to different places for certain ship parts, while building it. After you go to a staryard or any ship builder whatever special pieces they have should be unlocked in your outpost ship builder. Along with that you should be able to save unfinished ship builds, just not set them as home ship aka fly them cause it’s annoying having to attach certain modules just to make it optimal only to take it somewhere else and change those pieces cause they weren’t accessible from the first place and you lose money on them. I mostly use hopetech habs, stroud landing gear, a nova galactic cockpit and engines made by panoptes. I can get all the things but the engines at my outpost. I can get the cockpit and engines at new Atlantis but not the gear and habs. I can get the gear and habs at akila but not the cockpit or engines. Pretty annoying when I was trying to build my current beast but it ended up perfect
there are some things to love about Starfield, I really enjoyed the idea of shipbuilding. But I really think the game would have been better if it was set during this so called "Colony Wars" or whatever.. It would have been cool to see big space battles, stuff like that.
Exactly! The Colony War sounded like the perfect scenario to play the game in. The factions felt a little disappointing since you couldn't really do anything with them or affect the galaxy in any significant way. It would have been awesome to play during the war and pick a side and see how the galaxy unfolds after one side defeats the other. I'm honestly surprised that Betheada didn't do this since they typically do this like in Skyrim, Fallout 4 and Fallout: New Vegas. All of those games take place during a war where you can choose a faction to support. It's bizarre that they elected not to follow their own example in Starfield.
They purposely didnt do that since their piece of shit Creation engine can't handle wars. Need you be reminded how the 'war' in Skyrim was like? Literally just 6 or so soldiers from each side duking it out. *facepalm* That sort of shtick would've worked in 2011. Not today. Their Creation Engine already struggles to render that many NPCs in New Atlantis
@@oflippert I could see it, custom built, capital ships swooping in, massive space explosions, boarding said capital ships... but sadly they missed the mark.
In Skyrim they basically added a vampire war through DLC. Could be something with that sort of significance added later. Personally I didn't fall in love with Skyrim until I played all the DLC with it. I'm quite theBethesda fanboy though to clarify.
I think it comes down to how you are feeling on the day of playing any game. I played Morrowind and Shin Megami Tensei, basically Persona, and absolutely loved them, but later version I just got board because they were lacking that spark from earlier games. Plus, getting older, I just don't have the paicents playing long drawn out games
Thats me sadly. I got older, but i do want to try skyrim, wotcher 3 (2 and 1 maybe lol) dragons dogma, shit even metal gear solid the last game they came out which i heard is long af. Assassin creed games, etc... idk if ill have the patience to continue the story which i totally did when i was in middle school, high school, and early college years. Now, with work and all, idk...
I knew I was going to be disappointed with the game when I heard that it would have over 1000 procedurally generated planets, and they were using an updated Creation Engine. I played several hours and was so bored that I stopped and haven't managed to talk myself into returning.
Steam ratings are way more indicative of the game’s true quality because they are left by fans who actually play these games for fun, not people playing them as a job / shilling to keep their inside access.
