Starfield didn't want me to have fun (Discussion) 

Starfield got me back into No Mans Sky.

What's the point of adding stealth as an option if it's gonna be more bare bones than a granny in her grave? That's honestly just sad.

Starfield led me to try out Cyberpunk. I am also considering playing the Mass effect trilogy after getting it cheap on sale. The most interesting thing Starfield made me do was play The Invincible. That game was so good I read the book it was based on, so suddenly I am reading a sci-fi classic, all because of Starfield...

Agreed 100%. I haven't played Starfield personally but I followed it closely before and after release. It was Bethesda's one chance to make a comeback after making slop for so many years; instead, they made giga-slop. All the terrible coding, bugs, and performance issues (for whatever reason, objects with completely flat sides had thousands of polygons) can be attributed to the decision by Bethesda to outsource most of their coding to thousands of Indians, trading quality for quantity. This can only be interpreted as some form of cost-cutting, but with the vast budget where did all the money go? None of the writers earned it, considering how bad and bland the story is. It's all phoned-in and soulless. And with the game design, like you said, there is way too much heavy grind to fill out the game, amongst other things that make the game bigger but not better. Starfield is the archetypal example of why AAA games today all are terrible. They are written by HR managers, coded by bottom-of-the-barrel programmers, and designed by people who hate fun. All the NPCs are intentionally hideous, the world looks like a dystopia when it's not meant to be, and you get penalized for trying to do things your way. These games are designed for a "mass market" but all that means is reducing them to the lowest common denominator, instead of encouraging people to raise their standards. This has been the case for years and AAA studios are bleeding money as a result, and it'll continue until they either tone it back or they go under. I hope the latter happens honestly, because we need a radical change. Elite: Dangerous is a far better game for open-world exploration, and Mass Effect is way better for a story-based sci-fi game. And if you just want a massive RPG, Daggerfall Unity looks really good. Funny how a colossal company with modern technology can't beat themselves from over twenty years ago.

You dont have to finish the game to make a review. If the game makes you quit playing, you simply notify the audience that it happened and explain what you think was the reason behind it.

I love your section about stealth. It's an absolutely raw experience from a normal player trying to do normal things, and wondering why the game doesn't let you. Bethesda needs to study that and learn from it. How are you supposed to know that it's SPACE SUIT NOISE, not line of sight, that was alerting enemies? And you need to wear lighter weight equipment to make less noise. How could you know that? The game literally never explains it. I have hundreds of hours in Starfield and I genuinely don't think that equipment weight is ever explained anywhere. It's a mechanic inherited from other BGS games that actually have armor weight categories. It's a lot more obvious that a sneaky thief wears light weight leather armor in Skyrim. Not so obvious in Starfield when everything is just "Space Suit". GOOD LUCK new player! Enjoy!

The title is the best summary of the game i've heard thus far.

31:30 As is evident in every planet you visit, people have already come to the planet, found out it has nothing worthwhile, and has left decades earlier. All that remains are supplies they left in a cave, or pirates in a facility where they are confident that no one will want to go to. It makes perfect sense in many ways, but it's terrible for a game. And it's remarkably similar in philosophy to Fallout 76 at launch, where the Vaultkeeper already went and had the adventures there were to have in the areas you visit, and you're just there following them for... reasons.

Starfield is a really bad game, and is nothing like Fallout or Skyrim. You basically picked the worst game to play from Bethesda, and I say that as a big Bethesda fan.

Oh my god, "just by a better computer" he says. I've heard Todd Howard is kind of an ass, and that sure confirms it. Also, i really enjoyed this video even though i've had no interest in Starfield! Would love to see more of these discussion/review type videos if you ever feel like doing more

I can appreciate that a lot of people enjoy stealth in games, and are disappointed that Starfield doesnt give them a good option. But games in general i think could do more to make stealth "earned." Not seeing enemies through walls, not seeing their "sight cones," not turning functionally invisible simply because you crouched (you're a dude in a spacesuit holding an axe). All of that feels correct to me. Stealth should be a pain in the ass in most scenarios and really only viable some of the time. For example, if you're wearing a ghillie suit in a forest biome and moving a couple feet every couple min. That would be a fitting price for achieving stealth

When I start Starfield my Xbox keeps going into sleep mode. Who could blame it? But I love Starfield because it drove me to buy Baldurs Gate 3 and No Mans Sky which are actually fun to play.

It's funny to see you describe it like this, but that's kinda how I felt, too. Even more than that; to me, it reeks of contempt for its players, which was then affirmed by how they treated the people who posted negative reviews about it. I was a longtime fallout fan, and enjoyed many of the elder scrolls games, as well. But after this game, those sequels are off my radar. I saw the signs of their attitudes toward fans with Fallout 76 as well as many of the "ultimate editions" they'd put out with just blatently deceptive, poor quality real world goods, and decided I don't want to give them any more of my money. If I wanted to pay someone who thinks I'm dirt, I'd get an Onlyfans account.

Watching a Bethesda experts 8 hour full review and your recounting of your 10 hour first time Bethesda experience, both arriving at the same conclusion of "don't even bother with this game" is kind of magical.

This video is great! It depicts, almost in real time, the gradual descent into despair and disappointment that most people experienced with this game. Bethesda games are usually annoying, janky and have the finesse of a drunk monkey in a China shop... but they always had flair, edginess and branching quests that would let you mess up the world in unique and hilarious ways through several playthroughs. Starfield has none of that. It feels like it was made for modern school kids. It's horrifically bland, rigid, linear and boring imo. Even the pirates feel like a bunch of pretentious stuck up teenagers. The only things I enjoyed was the ship builder, ship component designs, sound effects, and landscape designs. The rest is dull af.

28:15 For me, the beginning interactions at the mining facility and at "The Lodge" made me feel like I feel when a stranger tries to scam me. If you've ever been approached out of nowhere by a multi-level-marketing person, or a "Dude, I wanna buy your car! Name your price!" con artist, that's how those events feel. You don't really do anything at the mining facility, yet he hands you HIS SHIP and a robot AND THIS "artifact" that is so GD important and inexplicably trusts you to go to the Lodge. This same behavior continues at the Lodge and it in no way feels earned. Passing out from touching an artifact and fighting off a small band of pirates is no reason for these characters to treat you like they do. If it had turned out these folks liked to talk a big game but would never step out of the lodge, themselves(wanted YOU to do all the work and take all the risk)... I might call it a clever bit of writing. But that's not at all how they're portrayed.

wow great video, i cant believe how much varied content you can which are all equally amazing!

It is the same mechanic in stealth as their old games. In Skyrim you start with little ability to do stealth other than throwing a basket over the shopkeeper's head and looting their store. Enemies will switch to agro without even seeing you and if you are using archery the enemy will literally jump 5ft out of the way to avoid your arrow. At the same time if you have a bounty the city guard will see you even if you are using an invisibility spell at all levels. By late level game you can be standing on top of a person's head and they have no awareness you are there. This continued on into the fallout games as well. I also see the indoor fog machines still exist from their old games for ambience but, it makes enemies invisible from across the room. They see you though. Beth companions always do this. if it makes you feel better the enemy ai is no better just drop back and let the companions run to their death.

i've never played Starfield, but the fact you found a bug at the start is.. pretty bad. also lmao the little red like/thumbsup to the bug is funny gonna watch the rest now

Appreciate the video. I really love the Bethesda style massive open world RPG, but they haven't been releasing quality for years.

Apparently, the problem with stealth in this game is how godly it was in Skyrim. It was incredibly powerful (some would argue too powerful) in that game. And rather than take a critical, intellectual look at it to see how they could improve it, in typical Bethesda fashion they decided, instead, to be lazy and "fIxEd it" by nerfing it to hell and making it useless. Bethesda are failures when it comes to listening to critical feedback and iterating upon their game design.

I feel like Elite: Dangerous did it's early game so well. You go from doing low-paying tutorial missions in a 5-star starter bubble to suddenly having access to the entire galaxy with all of it's riches and potential being laid out in front of you. The scale of the galaxy genuinely made me scared but also I have never felt so free in a video game before. Soon enough I was trading cargo worth an order of magnitude more than the starter ship in a spacecraft the size of a residential building. Progressing felt great because I decided to trade cargo and I decided to go pirate hunting, I didn't do these things because some NPC told me to do it.

Great stuff! This was a really interesting insight into a game I didn’t really plan on playing (and now definitely don’t plan on playing haha) Interesting to see a perspective on what the game’s like though. It seems there are a few great bits in there - the ship weapon allocation system seems like a genuinely really fun concept that has some cool potential. Shame it’s bogged down by… all the other stuff...

also feedback on the video: I dunno how you do this but you got the comedy on point, your voice makes things that wouldent be so funny really funny, dunno how to explain it

Companions need a "passive, active, neutral, aggressive" mechanic.

Full admission - I got to the 4th new game plus before the bugs, stutters, in fact all the technical problems finally overcame both the level of frustrated determination to see if it truly was where the actual long term gameplay lay (it wasn't) and my ability to withstand the sheer mediocrity of nearly everything I couldn't skip in pursuit of a faster completion (I did enjoy a lot of the combat but there's never as much of it as you think). Dull first 20 odd hours but I persevered and started to enjoy it, again largely because of the combat and the anticipation of exploration and flight - I'd been spoiled by Elite Dangerous which is a game that really knows how to use procedural generation to properly convey the scale & wonder of the cosmos without generating empty places on a handful of planets or moons just for the purpose, and the flight & space combat models are still untouched, so much so that Starfield's was extremely simplistic and half-arsed by comparison. The companions were just dull despite some of the voice talent recruited and wasted & I wish Bethesda/Todd would drop their obsession with cowboys because I took one look at Sam Coe and noped right on out. However, still I persevered until even the enjoyable things became simply mediocre, companions were there to be left behind at all available opportunities, future content you haven't reached that I won't spoil but god it all just made me cringe by the third playthrough if not the second or first, I could go on but I think you get the idea. I gave it a fair go by any measure but anyone seriously expecting this to be a game of even medium-length repeat play is in for a rude awakening. So I reached the same opinion you did with vastly less efficiency. Cherish the hours you have smartly chosen not to waste!

It's not you Axiom, the game is unfinished

gladly my run with starfield wasn't that bad in terms of performance, but you are very on point with other issues.. I also did run around that 100 meters even tho it felt dumb, and I also ran into that invisible wall in space which I totally agree was immersion breaking and very disappointing... And yeahh progression felt like a chore, and also is very stat-based, I think at one point I had like 5 free level-up points to spent, but all choices at that point just felt uninspiring and a bit boring, such a shame really.. I expected a lot since I was a huge fan of skyrim, but that was ages ago I guess games like outer worlds and rainworld spoiled me too much haha.. I went a bit further than you but even without any blue screens I didn't care enough to finish too

for the whole segment about stealth : actually stealth in previous bethesda games was overpowerded as fuck, so much so that it became a meme the simply crouching would make you invisible. bethesda tried to fix this, but since AI in a bethesda game is what it is, the only way to do that was to nerf the system into the ground. i'm prett surey dedicated players will still find a way to abuse it, tho for normal players its just super frustrating now.

Finally i see someone address the random freezes mid-fight. I thought it just was my 8 years old PC struggling to run it but seeing as you get freezes as well means there's something fundamentally wrong with the game. Especially considering what it offers compared to what it demands from your system. I played through the entirety of cyberpunk on high settings (with DLSS as i have RTX2060) and while it wasn't a smooth 60fps i could still play and enjoy the game. But with starfield i didn't get past the pirate station mission - constant freezes, no motivation due to boring and stale intro, fast-travel based movement - it all was so off-putting. I'm a huge space nerd but starfield absolutely failed at being interesting. It offers nothing new compared to other games, it's such a downgrade. I would advise playing Fallout 4 instead. I definitely had a lot more fun with it than starfield.

I had a similar experience. I had yet to play a game that couldn’t run on my PC. Naturally, I figured Starfield would be no different. It was so frustrating that I switched to Xbox S only to find out that it was almost as buggy on console! I really hoped for better…but even after patch the game is flawed.

On Skyrim, you mentioned you had a decision to make early in the game right after the dragon attack. Well that choice was Storm Cloaks or Empire, thing is its not a choice that matters not until much later. Todd even mentioned in Starfield Direct that "we know players hate to be kept out of content" or something along that line? Well I would argue that Todd and Team dont understand that players may not have ever realized on one play through that their choices in prior games never matted. Sure Skyrim the choice of Stormcloaks or Empire mattered, one of the few times they exercised such a thing but it does not have great impact and is not often done enough by Bethesda and here we have Todd proudly saying about Starfield we are locking you out of content due to choices. After all that failed to see he gave away how bad the game was with his words, sigh.

53:15 Most of the Starfield budget (ALLEGEDLY) went up Emil's nose.

For what it's worth, Starfield didn't feel like a Bethesda game to me. Modern Bethesda's usual flavor tends to be about the exploration and the environments. The sterile feeling you mentioned for Starfield was something I felt too and didn't like, and didn't recognize from Fallout or Skyrim. Skyrim and Fallout feel like games the developers loved, in settings they enjoyed, and with mythos and history and lore that intrigued them. Starfield feels flat, a blank slate, without a handful of vague questions, and no answers, in a jaded world you cannot really impact in any way with your choices. In all honesty, the real main character of a Bethesda game is the world, not any individual NPC or even the player character. Skyrim let you follow people as they lived their lives around towns, stumble into ancient ruins older than entire civilizations, or wonder at lost mysteries like the disappearance of the Dwemer or the motivations of old gods, all while sometimes taking your breath away with how beautiful and wild Skyrim's natural vistas could be. The wastelands of Fallout are desolation and destruction, tinged with a vibrant string of hope for humanity's survival, a mishmash of 1950s satire and sarcasm, and a dark undertone of corporate corruption and decimation, and it didn't shy away from either the dark or light of the human soul reflected back upon a warped wasteland. Starfield's world is disjointed, shallow, unconnected, and often very very empty, useful for bland resources, and with the occasional hiccup of simulated life, and you won't experience most of it because you're too busy fast traveling and menu-mashing to look around. If you really want to know the appeal of a Bethesda game, try Skyrim or Fallout (different people prefer different ones, so I'll leave no recommendation and let you work it out for yourself which you'd rather try). Go in prepared to explore the world as the goal, rather than a written story. Bethesda's quests only ever really served to get you exploring the various facets of the world itself. And skip the fast travel when you can/feel the itch to explore, because the real joy of these games lies in the journey between points A and B, at the points of interest or random encounters that make up the path, and bring in the flavor. It makes these worlds feel living and breathing and vast full of people who are living their own lives for their own reasons doing their own things, whereas Starfield just felt like a lot of weirdly cramped empty space built around you the player (not your choices, just you experiencing the everything).

Ironically and much to BGS's chagrin, the best BGS game was Fallout: New Vegas, which was created by Obsidian. It was so good and showed up BGS's laziness that they denied them the ability to make any future games even though many consider it the best modern Fallout game by far. And they only had 18 months to flip this project around while BGS was given four to six years depending upon which version of Fallout it is. If you want to experience that BGS magic it's done through playing Obsidian's Fallout: New Vegas. That's the game where your decisions has actual impact on the world and you can kill pretty much everybody--there's no plot armored NPCs that cannot die save a single robot so you can finish the game if you kill everybody else. The first hour should sell you on the game, no idiotic nonsense of it gtets fun twelve hours in. It's fun right from the start. The opening experience alone is great and I don't skip it when I replay it. Great video!

Dont worry, I played it all the way through. Having played a lot of games over many decades, Starfield can only be fun for people that have played very few games, easily a 4 or 6 out of 10. So its possible that people will enjoy it and even defend it, its just that well if you have played a lot of games well you have seen all those systems done better. IF you follow science fiction media Starfield will upset you because its poorly done writing that would be just fine about 20 years ago, but as there are many serious competitors in the gaming space with titles going back 20 years even well the science fiction writing is grade level at best and would have been great on a Nintendo Entertainment system from the late 80s. Flight was great back when we were playing Wing Commander Privateer in the 80's on PC. Halo Combat Evolved has way more enjoyable gunplay and combat than Starfield, a game that launched the first Xbox console.

I bought my first Bethesda game back in early 1995 with Elder Scrolls Arena and almost all of their games since. I legit wanted to love Starfield because i know they won't be making a new game for half a decade at least and that's a long time to wait for a new game to sink my free time into. I didn't buy Starfield and i never will. It looks so unimaginably bland i haven't played a single second of it and yet i feel sick of it. That same feeling you get when playing the same Skyrim character for 200+ hours and you've done absolutely everything of interest in the game and your only choice is to quit playing the game entirely or just suck it up and start a new character, that's how it feels for me when i look at Starfield. Starfield's greatest achievement was making Fallout 4 look good by comparison.

Bethesda USE to be great. After Morrowind they fell off. TES IV and V were good games, but they weren't what captured me as a fan of Bethesda. They make mediocre kinda trash arcade RPGs now

Bethesda's Pete Hines said that Starfield gets good after you complete the main story.

19:22 Sounds like Skyrim (Damn you Lydia) and Fallout 4.

You saved me from spending money thank you

I think an easy fix for the progression is to just make the challenges retroactive. Such a shame, I had high hopes for starfield not not being an incredible game but good enough. Didn't help that a lot of the youtubers who did earlier reviews were praising the game. It's usually not like me to buy into the hype but I don't I was starving for a good scifi rpgish space game so I bought into it. I like no man sky but I wanted a something a bit more grounded and starfield looked like it would be that. However it's so lacking, I don't even know how they could bring it back. Maybe this dlc will be incredible and be like starfield 2.0, guess only time can tell. Anyway nice discussion piece you brought up some good points, also the whole it gets better after x hours is just bs. I have 100+ hours and I 100% the game and it's pretty much the same all the way through. The issues I have with the game persist till the end of the game. I would also like to see if the game was a finical hit with BGS, just to see how likely it will be whether they support the game long term or not. I am leaning more towards the latter as it has been a bit and we are barely getting an updates.

most innovative gameplay for 2023 should have been Rainworld:downpour for sure. When i say downpour makes the game better and bigger, i mean it adds quality of life, more stuff, and quintuples the size of the game. It is criminal that starfield won innovative design, and its criminal that destiny 2 got nominated for community support. AAA games are dying frfr

Starfield is nothing but busy work and fetch quests. Your quest journal will fill up with garbage just from walking around and catching a word of npc dialog. "Hey stranger, I lost my favorite pencil on Earth. My mother made it on her deathbed with nothing but a nail clipper. Please find it for me. I'll be here, nursing the hell out of this drink, while you spend two hours kicking rocks on a dead, boring planet." I played it longer than I should have. I'm still salty about it. ETA: I'm surprised using health packs wasn't locked in the massive skill tree since everything else was.

I hear ya on all your problems with SF, well except for the PC issues. I got the game thru MS since its a 'play anywhere' title, and I havent had any of those worrisome issues like you were explaining. If I had, Id be done with it too! I run a 3080ti/R9 5900X so I dont think its your hw at all. Its likely the coding for Gamepass, as it is different than running a licensed version as you cant (or couldnt, not sure where its at now) mod with gamepass. Anyway, I dont play SF for any other reason than space jpegs and checking shit out but really you cant even call em space jpegs because space is optional in the space rpg 👀🤦 They really shit the bed on SF, but is it really suprising, the Skyrim people are all retired... Thanks for your thoughts and the vid!

This game looks hilariously bad. Classic Bethesda. Also, you mentioned in the Q&A I believe that you don't script videos like this? If that's the case then that is pretty impressive.

TES6 Will be the same, then well get the whole song and dance about the next guy taking over after much fanfare about the great and powerful Todd's departure... Then Microsoft will milk the Bethesda brand like its been a cornerstone of gaming since Morrowind on the original XBox, since thats what the last decade of pain and suffering was about. Odd, I know, but they were illustrating they were worth a buyout through proving consumer apathy to the whole situation (the state of AAA has a place in this as well, but thats a chew toy for another time). You're assessment was solid, you made it about as far as I did, and for the same reasons. Same experience on a 2070S with half the RAM and an SSD. When installed on a lesser drive, it was worse for audio, but that is just because the games streaming a total trainwreck. If you ever try the Bethesda brand again(which is all they really are), do yourself a favor and wait until it's a year or two old so fans have had time to fix all the bugs, and then don't try to play vanilla... You have to make your own games with a Bethesda title if you want a Bethesda "game" to be in any way better than what you experienced here.

I liked starfield until I ran into the first of many bugged quest, found out some of the perks are bugged and don’t even work at all but, what really broke the camels back was when I set up a outpost on Bessel 3 and returned to my ship and everything i stored in my ship that wasn’t in the cargo hold got deleted or replaced with junk. 6 months after release and that game breaking bug exist. I won’t buy another Bethesda game, they’re a lost cause.

No surprise. The only good game Bethesda ever released was Morrowind. It was all downhill from there. Daggerfall arguably only got good through the Unity port. All their worldbuilding has been done by people no longer working at the company or stolen from Black Isle after the Fallout IP sale. This is Emil's finest work. lol. Btw damn, finished the video. Good work btw. I had no idea the fishbowl was that bad. Man they couldn't even get the moon and earth in the same fishbowl LOL Also to answer your ending questions. Check out Morrowind with OpenMW and Tamriel Rebuilt. Or Daggerfall with its Unity port. This is Bethesda's best work. If you looking for Fallout, try Fallout New Vegas. The only good modern Fallout from Obsidian. Funnily enough the space portion of Starfield's problems could have been fixed if Microsoft finally found that long lost Freelancer source code. They could have duct taped that part to the creation engine and actually had a working space sim. But Freelancer was actually a good game. IMO the only game that has truly felt alive in its systems and it was from 2003.

You should try Cyberpunk 2077 if yoy haven't already now that it's fixed. It's honestly amazing and I'm glad I gave it a second chance. I'm saying this here because I've seen a lot of folks compare that game to Starfield.

1:07:09 Bethesda games are usually not exactly like this. They are absolutely full of bugs and jank, but it's usually nothing that will crash games and break your PC. Like they are usually the funny kind of glitches, like dragons flying backwards and flipping out in skyrim, the giants launching you into the stratosphere, skyrim horse is a term I've seen people use to describe horses acting janky in other games, the oblivion NPC jank is super iconic, tons of really funny clips about that on youtube. The jank in the old games was more forgiven by the players just because of how groundbreaking and innovative these games were for their time. I remember losing my shit about being able to pick up apples and rotating them in front of my face in oblivion or putting a bucket on the shopkeeper's head to make it so that they don't see me steal their stock. The starfield bugs are just boring and obnoxious, like crashing your PC and unbinding your keys, despawning things you need to interact with, clipping stuff out of bounds for no reason, etc. Search for a video named "How Joseph Anderson broke Starfield". It's just sad that this game was released like this

_Starfield_ relies heavily on CPU for some reason. Hell, I got it for "free" with my new processor! (R9 7900X3D)

I really like your chill vibe. When it comes to annoying mechanics - yes, most bethesda games are like this. BUT starfield is the worst of them. Previous games didn't lock core stuff like stealth meter behind progression. Companions are always dumb. Ones that I liked I kept "for flavour". Their best companions were in Fallout 4(Hancock and Nick Valentine are my loves!) - with commentary on quests and locations. Starfield companions are a massive step back - they're not only stupid but also bland. The thing about the chore nature of progression - I think they took that lazy move from Fallout 76 - it has "challenges" that reward players with goodies or in-game microtransactional currency - atoms(to buy goodies). Those challenges are always mind-numbingly annoying and unreasonable.(Like kill 1000 robots with your bare hands for measly 40 atoms). I usually love bethesda games (even FO76), but Starfield retroactively soured them for me. Now when I see some lazy decision in their older games I just think "u-huh. I see where it's going.😒"

Picking stealth build in Starfield is about as useful and fun as a wet fart 😂

What makes Bethesda games so special into acclaimed by so many people: Mods by the community. People rallied out of necessity because Bethesda sucks so bad, and no kidding, Bethesda just went with it. They did everything to boost their valuation to sell their business to the highest bidder and it finally paid off after milking skyrim fir a decade. I. The process they made it their business to screw consumers as much as possible, rolling all their gains into marketing and advertising while relying on the community to make content for their platforms(which I'd argue is Bethesda's actual product, their engine, not their games.). Turns out, if you have enough money(market share), you can make more. In case you haven't been following along all these decades, thats pretty much the Bethesda story in a nutshell.

The game is jam-packed with impediments to enjoyment. A lot of basic stuff is skill-gated that shouldn't be. The rest is bug-riddled, or hampered by bone-headed design decisions.

Speaking in general about bethesda, its basically like you said a downward spiral. Every game they release is slightly more dumbed down and slightly worse overall. Skyrim was ok, but made great with mods. Same with fallout 4, but still dumbed down a bit from Skyrim. Starfield weve left good territory and entered meh territory.

Bethesda games arent my favorite, but they usually have a pretty decent and fun exploration game loop.... Starfield fucks that up lol

Stealth is locked behind skill points. It's still not good. If you get the Stealth Armour from the Ryujin campaign it's a _bit_ better, but still lame.

I didn't expect a hour long video of just starfield, but I can appreciate it~ Going to be honest, might be relying on your narration and whatever amount of script you put into this to not lose interest here Leo XP After playing the game myself and coming away so underwhelmed and then starfield winning an award that I frankly had THREE other games thinking contending far better than it.... Starfield really does make me tired and bored usually. And yea.. There are rumors its a troll effort, but they're awards which could've went to someone who would've actually treated them meaningfully. Your Only Move Is Hustle, Shadow Of Doubt, Heck, I don't think it reached the end 10 options but I honestly think the finals would've been a 100% better choice than starfield. But I guess thats the point if its a troll award. If theres any game that actually displays triple A's serious problem of mediocrity, its this. Game critics will criticize a lot of mechanics that are recycled, and there is merit in that, but I think that many of them forget that familiar mechanics really do help people get adjusted to a game. I mean, Brigador not being a twin stick shooter despite looking like one to some extent, causing massive backlash because it didn't corrolate for players, so bad that they had to change its control scheme to twin stick despite it teaching bad habits for the game to players. Rainworld's tutorials being more or less non-existent and learning anything in the game requires you to inadvertently repeat tricks til you know them.~ I bring these two up because they break the norm of mechanics and controls, and because of that, are relatively unknown. This in of itself shows the value of repeat and steady mechanics such as watch towers, long grass, stealth, or even the RPG mechanics they've stuffed into the later assassins' creeds and far crys (even if personally, I think its really, really garbage as someone who has generally struggled to care for rpgs). They're familiar, they let the player feel confident that they're in territory they can play, and majority of the struggle they might have is cleanly conveyed in levels, numbers, and other information readily available. That is the power of current gen triple A. I think a few people have hit the mark that they're broad appeal, but never super talked about why that might be. Lethal Company, Helldivers 2, and numerous other games have shown you don't need triple A to possibly bring in triple A audience (maybe saying hell divers and lethal company brings in a triple A audience is innately wrong, as they're both very 'gamer sphere' type games with their intrictices, but I think about 80% of people who have bought games digitally would say they've heard of lethal company, its not all, but I'd wager thats majority of players who might play triple A games semi regularly~ only) This is becoming a essay, anyways. My entire point is that triple A is the way that it is because its familiar, but that it doesn't always have to be, at least not 100%, to work. And yet, Starfield over here blowing it all out of the water with just how... bland it is. The fact that they tried to lean into modders making the game interesting says so freaking much, I don't like condemning developers, but Bethesda screwed this so hard that they could very well slip into obscurity if they don't have a big hit on their next release. I'm not confident at all that they could fix starfield like Projek Red fixed cyberpunk....

I didn't like the game but I think your issues with the sound and freezing were something besides the game.

Starfield is a poorly made mod for Fallout 4, even Fallout 4's "Project Lunar" is more interesting than Starfield.

Actually never heard of Starfield, the aesthetics of the game look pretty cool, although not like my cup of tea. Unfortunate, that it didn't turn out that enjoyable for you, but suppose nonenjoyable games make the enjoyable ones more memorable.

So...stealth! Sniper! Try sniper ghost warrior contracts 1 and 2.

So this is the Starfield video! I haven't played the game, but from I've heard from other reviews, although the game is not perfect, it was a big step for Bethesda and was well received.

So u graduated high school in 2005

id say you were lucky with how bad starfield played for you cuz for me it just gave me blue screens for almost every game i play now

No Man’s Sky is the worst parts of Starfield amplified, and the central single player narrative completely missing. In other words it’s even further away from the successful Bethesda games’ formula than Starfield is. Cyberpunk is a better replacement.

Where to start. People who are older and paid attention have watched the fall of Bethesda under Todd for a long, long time. Morrowind was ok... buggy... complex. And buggy is a feature, not a bug, in Bethesda games. They dumbed the systems down for Oblivion, then further dumbed the systems down to almost non-existent for Skyrim. This is a design choice by Todd because he doesn't like complex; he wants simple so it appeals to the masses. It got worse with the Fallout IP. Fallout 3 wasn't a horrible TRY by Bethesda to bring Fallout into what games were transitioning to at the time. But you knew that Todd was pushing more for a looter shooter than RPG. This was confirmed when Fallout 4 dumbed the systems down further to focus on gun play. They dropped all pretense with Fallout 76; it's a looter shooter. Period. And that is what you got in Starfield; a looter shooter in space using the old engine and Fallout 4 assets reskinned. So no. You don't want to play other games by Bethesda because the other games need to be modded to be good. That is also a feature, not a bug. Modders have fixed all of Bethesda's games; Morrowind has mods, Oblivion has mods, Skyrim has mods, Fallout 4 has mods. The biggest mods people add first fix the bugs. Then, you can add graphics mods. Then gameplay overhaul mods that fix things like stealth, combat, companion AI, etc. It is why Skyrim is played over a decade later; mods. And Todd, after trying to kill the modding scene for Skyrim and monetize it, bet that modders would do the same thing for Starbored. Todd, and those he put in charge like Emil, are the problem. Todd doesn't want an RPG. He wants dumb looter shooters with microtransactions. You saw this in your time in Starbored. Why do your companions just rush in and trigger a fight? Because looter shooter bayyyybeee. Go shoot things. Get your loot. It's FUN! Just wait for Starbored to get it's microtransactions like Skyrim, Fallout 4, and Fallout 76. They ARE coming btw just as soon as Bethesda believes they can add them and not get TOO much heat from it. TES:VI IS going to be garbage. We know this because Fallout 4 was garbage and almost unplayable on launch. We were told, "get a better computer" for Fallout 4. Fallout 76 was a disaster at launch with Bethesda doing their best to scam the players/customers at every turn. Starbored is a barebones, boring game where you got told, "buy a better computer". And people think with THAT track record SUDDENLY Todd will say, "Hey, lets make a GOOD game". No. So until Todd is gone, Emil is gone, and some others... don't buy Bethesda games.

Wokefield made me try out BG3.

I had to relearn to perceive missions in other games as meaningful and worth doing again 😢

Holy shit, SF is so bad it managed to almost cook your GPU. A store exception BSOD is a graphic card issue (usually)

Starfield is a writing failure, the story, the idea, and the execution were all off, so your feelings the first time you get to constellation make total sense, you are disconnected, and there`s no "why". The game starts strong, with you (a miner) finding the artifact, but after you meet Barry, everything goes downhill, there`s no reason for him to give you the ship, nor for you to fight pirates in space, or into their hideout, there`s also no reason for you to go to constellation either. I`ve seen some really bad stories and paces, but Starfield makes zero sense whatsoever, stuff is there for the sake of being there, with no purpose, and if you try to look into things, it`s hollow, all surface deep, it`s like the old saying, you can only write a story as intelligent as yourself. To give you an example, Skyrim storyline, the closest "faction" that you must interact with, is the Greybeards, and you do so out of curiosity, you discover that you have powers, that you have the thu'um, and that you are something called Dragonborn, and that the Greybeards are the experts on the matter and they want to see you, there`s a discovery purpose, you wanna know what that will lead you, what will happen next? you are intrigued by that, you have a purpose, a reason, a motive, to interact with that faction, even though it`s mandatory, it doesn't feel like. Starfield on the other hand, you have no purpose yet, you don`t know what's going on, and everything is happening so fast, what is a constellation? why should I care? sure they know about this artifact that I touched but why should I go there first? and not let's say, a hospital to get checked? I didn`t see much other than some hallucinations and a faint... IMO what should`ve happened, is you starting your rookie job has a miner, you find the artifact, you grab it, you faint and you get a power, and no one there including the miners, knows what that is, the Chief asks for an escort, so they take you and the artifact to go to a Medical station to get tested, on your way there you get attacked by the Starborn (who you don`t know yet), you manage to slip away but crash-land on a random moon/planet, you need a battery (or whatever) for a rescue SOS beacon, you go to a POI on the map, get the rescue going, pirates come in, you deal with the pirates, you get a pirate ship (you can become a pirate from this point too), OR you go to the medical station, you are in stolen property (pirate ship), so Sysdef asks you questions, you explain the situation and they can clear you and offer you to enlist later, thanks to your abilities dealing with the pirates, the Medical station checks on you, find nothing, they check the artifact, find nothing, so they call Expert help, here Constallation comes in, and they offer you a choice to learn more about it, but at this moment onwards, you are free to do whatever you want, and not forced into Constellation right from the start.

Bethesda games were never special. They were just the first to do something cool and never improved on it.

Your PC "should" have been fine, i9 10900F not bad CPU and a 3080.....Only thing I would do is go purchase 2x32 gig RAM kit or maybe even a tad more, as long as it was under 100 bucks would really help with doing Lets Plays and Video's while gaming.....More Ram better.

Are Bethesda games like this? My response, YES. I would not be playing Bethesda games if not for the Fallout IP being owned by them. Morrowind on Xbox, after the save file achieved a certain size the Xbox could not load it, and it would read "Corrupted Save". That was back before internet really took off, if you wanted to get an updated Morrowind game, you bought a brand new copy an had to check on the box that it was the fixed version. Bethesda games are pretty unplayable without the Modding community.