I'm glad you are able to be honest with yourself about the game instead of forcing another Skyrim/Fallout 4. It sadly isn't the hit or evolution many wanted from Bethesda. Interest was there for the first few weeks, then said interest took a nosedive.
I think anytime I see a Starfield review, and I see people say that the planets are empty, amd the solar system is unsastisfying, I always have one recommendation: Outer Wilds (not The Outer Worlds, it's different). I think that Outer Wilds is the best space game that exists. Its a VERY different game to Starfield, so if it's not your thing, then I get it, but to me, Outer Wilds is actually one of the greatest games ever, both conceptually, and in execution. Outer Wilds is an open world, space exploration game, puzzle game, taking place in a fully and beautifully hand-crafted solar system. It's an indie game, which came out in 2019, and has one DLC which released in 2022 The progression is fully knowledge based, so once you know something, you can't un-know it, so please AVOID ALL SPOILERS, the game is best enjoyed when you know nothing. A no-spoiler synopsis, is that you are the newest recruit of your home planet's astronaut program. What sets you apart, is that you're equpiied with a Nomai translator, which translates the language of an ancient alien species who used to livein the same solar system as you, but all thats left is the ruins of their society. You set out to uncover the secrets of the Nomai, and your solar system. I TRULY can't recommend this game enough, it is so fantastic, and this is meant for anyone reading this comic, please give this game a try. It is, imo, the perfect space exploration game, and one of the best games ever.
Turns out 16x the size isn't necessarily better... and Starfield was 16x the 16x the 16x the size of fallout 4 and accomplishes nothing with it because there's nothing between points a, b, and c because you warp everywhere.
I'd say starfield is about two to three times the size of vanilla fallout 4 based solely on content & playtime, & the warping/fast travelling is there to make the "nothing" in between entirely optional.
One run through of the game I committed myself to visiting every star system. I scanned every planet though I did not fully survey every planet, I tended to fully survey them occasionally and on a whim if there was a point of interest on the planet with a name that intrigued me. Surveying planets is a slog. Too many reused assets. Flora, Fauna, and structures tended to get old after the fifth time you've seen them. There are several kinds of points of interest to discover some of them very interesting, but it did get repetitive pretty quickly. I especially liked it whenever a ship was detected in system, or there was a space station to explore as those had a higher chance to be unique or at least, not obviously common. That's about the closest to natural exploration you get in this game compared to previous Bethesda titles. I enjoyed ship combat, especially after putting some skill points into piloting (which unlocks strafing) and targeting (which unlocks targeting specific systems). Not really sure how I feel about those mechanics being gated behind skill points. In general I think pumping in over a 1000 planets diluted the experience too far. It would have been better with like 10 planets or fewer that were fully fleshed out with multiple non-procedural settlements/cities and then _maybe_ some randomly populated planets with no hint of human presence whatsoever if you really need to sell that _final frontier_ feel.
This is probably the most positive review for this game that i’ve seen that is not from a paid reviewer (or someone who’s hyped up on a new game launch). I didn’t even know the game was a thing until it released and what little I saw of it just made me think it’s not a game that i’d want to play. That sucks since a new Bethesda series would be cool but sadly this didn’t seem to hit the mark. I’m glad you found some enjoyment in it at least.
Only way to pull more fun out of it would be to mess with a totally different character. With how well you did creating C.B. I'm sure you could, but I'd by no means expect you to do that on camera; just for personal interest. Starfield's an interesting look at the current limits of A.I.-generated content, given that it can generate a decent amount of space, but the distribution of certain features feels way too 'even', like gas vents. The environment generation still has trouble making organic features over a wider area. Something I love about it was the character building. I love its perks/talents system and the return of initial character traits and such. I hope that continues to play into ES6. I'm curious if the A.I. generation can be made to work as a side feature, like an expedition type radiant quest. I understand the concept they went for, using it to create Starfield's more logically-sized space experience, but I wonder if a more limited application would see better results.
I would love to see a Stephen and friends episode on Helldiver's 2; a 4 player co-op game that takes inspiration from Starship Troopers. It's also fairly cheap being only $40 but delivering in my opinion a value far greater than most AAA games priced at $60 or $70.
When a game like this comes out, I usually wait for a significant price reduction or sale before I buy it. With series I've played before, like Elder Scrolls, I get it close to the release date. You can usually depend on the modding community to fix any major or minor glitches and problems with Bethesda games.
Starfield was never my cup of tea genre-wise (I much prefer things like TES), but I wanted to at least watch some gameplay cause I knew that this would pave the way for what to expect with TES6. There are aspects that I sincerely hope will be ironed out and carried over--the floating/anti-gravity/jetpack combat, for example. It makes me hope that levitation magic will come back in the next Elder Scrolls, cause clearly the coding is there. It's obviously possible for them to do. I also liked the idea of picking a background that affects some of your skills from the start. It's a great way to flesh out your character and give roleplaying opportunities. That being said, I agree that Bethesda really needs to take a look at what people considered boring or bad about Starfield and learn from it. Open world games should allow for choice and exploration. There shouldn't be a definitive 'right' way to play, beyond having as much fun as you can with it. And to those who genuinely had a good time with it, that's great!
I'm probably going to be a bit harsher, having extremely fond memories of Skyrim around launch and a decent experience with Fallout 4, I jumped into Starfield with "Bethesda" Expectations. Knowing it was going to be buggy, but as long as I enjoy myself it'll be fun. I slogged through Starfield, 40 hours of being bored out of my mind, rushing the main story, trying to do side quests to find any redeeming quality, and I sadly didn't find it. I'm glad there are some people who enjoyed it, but for me. This was the worst game I've played in years, if I wanted to play Oblivion. I'll go play Oblivion, not some $70 unoptimized HD Space Oblivion. But again. I'm thrilled that there are some people who enjoyed it.
There is actually a *small* amount of natural discovery, namely on the scale of cities, since while in a city you mostly do have to run from your current objective to the next with relatively little fast travel, and the other part is something I mentioned before with how Starfield is kinda trying to be the quintessential Bethesda experience cutting off everything else, so while it cut out the travel which lead to the natural discovery, it still tries to keep the discovery element by occasionally throwing a more or less random event at you when you arrive. Random pirates are there to attack you, or there's a distress signal or whatever. So it's kinda like they cut out what they felt was unnecessary and tried to keep important bit, not really seeing how the "unnecessary" part is kinda what made it important. It's why I've said before that Starfield feels like it's missing the soul of a Bethesda game. Starfield does make me *very* curious about how Elder Scrolls 6 will be, because IMO there's two big potential routes: Todd either learns from this, sees the opinions on the game, etc. and strives to understand the players better, making ES6 potentially amazing, or Todd doubles down and we won't see anything coming close to Skyrim for a very long time. In the meantime, if you ever feel like you want to play a Bethesda-style RPG for some reason, I'd love to recommend Kingdom Come: Deliverance. It wasn't made by Bethesda, but it's very much the same style of open world RPG with pretty good writing, and a very interesting combat system.
Starfield isn't a sequel to fallout 4 nor skyrim. That alone can clear up a lot of confusion. It's similar but different, & it was always going to be due to the setting. Starfield absolutely has the soul, or the spirit, of a Bethesda game. The care & attention to detail is there in (almost!) every aspect of the game. Not saying your opinion is wrong at all, but in my opinion starfield +dlc will be every bit as great as skyrim or fo4, & there's no reason to be concerned for ES6.
@@skyriminspace We know it's not a sequel to Skyrim, but it is still the same type of game, a Bethesda open world RPG. People's problem isn't with the setting, it's how the game ended up. A lot of the design choices simply make the game way less fun than it could've been, Stephen's point about the natural discovery is one of the biggest examples of this, and the fact someone like him, who 100%-ed both Skyrim and FO4 because he loved them, feels like game is just passable shows clearly that Starfield very much went in the wrong direction. A lot of parts of the game definitely have the great Bethesda quality we love, but there's more than enough problems where it's missing, I don't see any way for it to become on par with Skyrim at all. Even on the technical side, as Stephen mentioned there's still bugs that have been part of Bethesda games for many games now, and while some of them are just harmless and funny which IMO should actually stay, in Stephen's LP there's multiple quests that got bugged couldn't be completed even after all this time since release, and these are not randomly generated radiant quests.
@@The_Intelligent_One i'm generalising of course. There are so many people who act like starfield IS a sequel to those older games, just because it's by the same studio! Yeah, i totally agree about the natural discovery being a tiny part of starfield, in comparison to older games. I wish they'd made large handcrafted areas surrounding NA or AC. Maybe a route to another settlement? I miss following a road just to see where it leads like in Skyrim. Early on i wasn't having such a good time with starfield, but i leaned into the familiar parts, found out how epic ship building & photo mode can be, & i was off! I hope more people come around as dlc arrives. There is a great game here somewhere, despite the undeniable flaws!
Do you think you'd ever play some of bg3? like obviously not 100% there is so much in that game, but even as a first 20 or stephen and friends? I really recommend multiplayer with friends it is SO much fun!
I think this game is a really interesting look into who bethesda is as a company. because there were multiple ways to learn the lesson of bigger isn't better, and they've literally learned this lesson before. Both Arena and Daggerfall are way bigger than Morrowind, but aren't fun to explore because most of the continent is just randomly generated terrain between cities. They realized this and that's why Morrowind was scaled down, so each locale was unique and fun to find. Plus there's No Man's Sky which made literally the exact same mistake Starfield did like 7-8 years ealier.
@@skyriminspaceI never said you couldn't like those games, if you do more power to ya. I think it's just interesting to view the actions of Bethesda with this stuff in mind.
@@fayerunestarfield made no mistakes. It was review bombed by jealous ponies. Also by r@cists, and star citizen ufo investors. Then the appeasers of toxic zombie ponies, reddead r@cists, ufo investors joined in and gave their nipple of attention to their cry bully babies. That's why Dr Disrespect liked it, while simp wimp peon types found the game too hard and joined those who prefer being ridden by a trojan pony.
Hearing about the no natural discovery is just making think that Bethesda saw the love that Outer Worlds got and thought they could do it by just making a space game, without any consideration as to why it was good
Starfield, to me, epitomizes an observation that I’ve had for a long time about video games that try to aim for hyper-realism. Not a bad goal, but I think it’s a mistake to act like it’s the key to ~immersion~ or whatever. In practice, pooling tons of resources into the visuals AND the scale of things makes for a deadly combination that creates what I call “empty detail” or stuff you can’t do anything with. Because then there’s less room for technical polish, clever design, quality of life changes, and even passable writing. It’s like building a huge custom bookcase and then only putting like 5 books on it. You gotta appropriately match the container to the content.
@@skyriminspace haha I guess it is somewhat of a space fantasy rather than sci fi. Which I’m fine with personally. I mean hyper-realism as it applies to visual art, though
@@lindenbug oh yeah i agree with you. They obviously poured effort into the ship building stuff. Sometimes i just wander around in my ship checking out all the tiny details. & i actually do follow the guy's advice & check the outside for heat leech nests every couple of landings!
I'm kinda curious on how Stephen would like Cyberpunk 2077. I feel like it does a lot of the things Starfield tried to do but a lot better. Probably not the type of thing you would typically have on his channel, but maybe it would be a fun experience.
really cool to hear your thoughts on the game stephen. I couldn't get into the game myself (mostly because it was poorly optimized on pc, and also it didn't seem that fun), but i think "it's fine" is a reasonable takeaway
do think a lot of people who went in blind might've had a "less than fine" perception of the game though, since they didn't ask other people where to find the fun
@@gonzy_estavezcould be the other way around actually. Online discourse has a funny way of predisposing players towards a good or bad experience with new games.
It took them 8 YEARS to do that, too. 8 years, and I find myself playing Fallout 4, Skyrim, and Morrowind. Sad. And then to use the "Disney Defense" and say it's the fans that are at fault because the product is great is worrying, to say the least.
I included the Ryujin quests and enjoyed them. I’m not the best at stealth but sometimes I enjoy them as a challenge. Overall I enjoyed the game, but it didn’t me grab me enough to replay for 2-3 years like I did Skyrim and Fallout 4 and Bioshock.
stephen, if you’d like to play a story-based sci-fi series, i’d love to see you play mass effect ! it’s an older game series, very enjoyable with choices that feel like they matter . there’s 3 games + a spin-off (haven’t played the spin-off but heard mixed opinions). it’s a great time, amazing characters, combat that evolves from game-to-game, and a similar character creation to starfield in terms of character backgrounds ! there’s a very likely chance you have played it or seen it, but i would love to see your approach or thoughts on it!! ^^
@@fr0ggisoup its awful blue grey colour scheme through out. It also has that feel of a trash 70s daytime American soap opera. Note the cover of 'Time' January 12, 1976. And you will literally find it in the Mass Effect Citadel DLC. *shudders* eww
@@UmmerFarooq-wx4yo i get what you mean about the coloring but it isn't exactly a recent game lol. to each their own, i found the character driven story interesting, didn't see how it was relatable to a soap opera given the whole political drama aspect .
My brother mentioned the reason they didn't put a map in was because it would be hard to make a map of places that procedurally generate. It'd be way nice if it was for the big cities, but maybe Bethesda was like "nah we've put enough into this" I also still resent comparing Starfield to Oblivion in any manner 😛
You’ve got a lot of really good points but it’s space. It’s not always sapposed to be interesting. I’m sure most planets and moons out there are actually quite boring. When you say it needs to be interesting within 40 seconds of walking somewhere to add content? Are you a dopamine fiend? Like common, just play and enjoy the rocks and the views, that’s what I like. You just get lost on a moon somewhere with nothing and it feels great! That’s just me though.
The problem going into Starfield that I feel so many had was they were thinking it was going to be some "generation defining" title. Self-proclaimed overhype and forgetting it's a Bethesda title (as they have a very distinct approach to RPGs) definitely sabotaged people's impressions. I thoroughly enjoyed the game because of the expectations I set for myself going in, but I do agree that there are a lot of gameplay and design choices that are heavily questionable given their track record with their other IPs.
Yeah, to me I feel the bar for open world games and rpgs has been raised to new heights and bethesda is lagging behind. Maybe it's not fair to play a comparison game, but as a consumer when i spend 60-70 dollars on games like Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, and Baldur's Gate 3, it makes it hard to appreciate whatever Bethesda tried to do with this game. They used to be the golden standard for open world games and now it feels like they are just behind the times. If this was a lesser known studio the game being "mid" would hurt a lot less. Not to mention No Man's Sky, that feels more in line with whatever this game was trying to accomplish with its "1000" planets. Sad for sure. I hope they learn from this and other games and give us that magic experience we want with ES6
"That magic experience" has a lot more to do with the player's own expectations than a lot of people think. I still recall playing skyrim on my ps3 in November 2011. It was like someone had designed a video game just for me. I get the exact same feeling from starfield, + as a bonus the characters/writing/voice acting is light years improved which more than anything makes the world feel alive. Not saying your opinion is invalid at all, just that there are those of us out here who really found the fun in starfield.
One of my special interests right now is Starfield and the overwhelming nothingness it provides. I wanted to love it, I tried to like it, but ultimately it fell short. The lack of design document and the attitude of "no ideas are bad ideas" caused the game to be an unguided mess, from the writing and quests, to the mechanics, and even the aesthetics between cities. I could seriously write an essay on it
There is a design document. Go to Bethesda's website & somewhere on there it specifically mentions the use of "an internal developer wiki". It's how they can make a believable self-referencing world that doesn't contradict itself. The writing (not to mention voice acting) in starfield is the best of any Bethesda game since morrowind.
Your thoughts echo mine pretty well. It was just a really big, boring game. Like a very "Cs get degrees" approach to game design mixed with complete apathy from anyone who had to build resources for the game. I'd be fascinated to get Alex's take from a game design perspective
Really?! I see real passion everywhere i go in starfield. Did you watch that 45 minute "starfield direct"? Those people were about as far from apathetic as possible & it shows up in their work. The game isn't perfect. (Hell, it's not even finished until dlc arrives). But to the right kind of player it's a great game.
Bethasda titles are mid and average though and have been for quite some time. They are just dressed up in a lot of makeup. It’s well done makeup, but it’s makeup nonetheless.
I agree. I would also add that this game has a ton of illusion of choice. It has the same issue as Fallout 4, which is that it's a first person shooter with a few RPG elements thrown in. When you're given dialogue options, they rarely ever lead to different outcomes - it's effectively just giving you multiple ways of reaching the same conclusion. That was probably the biggest disappointment for me, after they used the new dialogue system as a selling point. It's definitely... Just fine. I got probably 60-70% through the story, put it down one day, then never felt like picking it up again. There are certainly some awesome segments, but, for me, this game has no staying power. I'll wait until the DLC releases before uninstalling, but my hopes aren't super high, if I'm being honest.
Like others have said before, weirdly enough this releasing after Bomb Rush Cyberfunk was pretty bad, since Bomb Rush is a game soley focused on making movement fun, for those who played both having to slowly run in barren wastelands was made so much worse after pulling off trick combos in BRC
I wish Bethesda would create a new mission per week and add to the game. Like, populate a planet and put a crisis on it that the player needs to resolve, like a Star Trek Original TV Show episode. That would generate lasting sales for years.
It would just turn into a mobile game garbage pile though. Just doing “weeklies” out of obligation for people that genuinely like the game and everybody else would stop playing quickly.
One of my biggest gripes with Starfield has also been the very limited sense of discovery. Well, there really isn't one, is there? It just feels very linear, which is strange for a game like Starfield where you kind of expect it to be open-world. At least for the most part. Most of it also just felt very copy-paste? Like, the NPCs, for instance. The little girls in the game all looked the same. Literally The Same. Some quests were too buggy to play and they were boring as hell. It felt very unimaginative and definitely lowered the overall quality and enjoyment of the game for me.
I played 10 minutes of it. Thought gunplay was pretty good actually! Ended up just thinking wow... This is a Fallout 4 reskin.... and never played again
I've never watched the Skyrim or Fallout playthroughs because, while Stephen's commentary is great, I just find the settings of those games so uninteresting that it doesn't grip me. By contrast, Starfield was a setting that actually did grab my attention. It's just a shame the overarching plot really didn't live up to that setting.
As glitchy as it was at launch, Cyberpunk 2077 really changed how I view open world games. Actually, Xenoblade did it first for me I guess, but for the more shooter RPG style of games like Starfield, Cyberpunk is just... on another level. So many details. So many unique quest strings. So many world-building moments, good customization, the authentic feeling of going wherever you want on the map naturally... it took them a bit, but they really made Cyberpunk something special. I haven't played it after the newest big update and the DLC, but the fact that I'm SO eager to totally start over and start a new campaign to see the DLC and new gameplay stuff should say something. If you haven't played it yet, I highly recommend it!!
Can't believe Pokémon games had better senses of exploration than a game by the SKYRIM devs (both SCVI or Legends Arceus could go here depending on your personal opinions on those games, or you could just disagree with me, that's fine too)
I did not enjoy starfield much at all and quit early on. I also did not love fallout 4 all that much however I have a hundred or so hours with it. I don’t know if these types of games work much for me anymore because even the outer worlds which had a lot better reviews and js by obsidian which are supposed to be better at making Bethesda games than Bethesda but it is just okay to me. I think that maybe these types of games don’t lend themselves well to the current game market in the way that companies make games nowadays if that makes sense. Idk maybe it’s just me
I bought a Series X to give Starfield my best shot and, goodness, it was probably my worst gaming purchase in a very long time. I watched the Skyrim LP religiously when it came out and did the same for the Fallout 4 LP for a time before I fell off of it. I did try to watch a few of this one's LP, but I just really did not care to watch it as the bad taste from trying it myself and genuinely disliking it after awhile lingered. I really do not think that Bethesda has what it takes to do games with the cultural impact as Skyrim anymore after Fallout 76 and now Starfield. They rested on their laurels for far too long and forgot what made Skyrim great. Gaming in general's insane push for $100 million games and all-eggs-in-one-basket type games like Bethesda was doing with Starfield and Rockstar is doing with GTA VI is very much an all or nothing approach and I really do feel like they could've had a better, more concise Starfield and Elder Scrolls VI out in the time it took for them to put out the current Starfield. There just was WAY too much scope and not even remotely enough quality for that scope going on. 11 years between entries is far too long. I bailed on Starfield and tried Cyberpunk 2077, and I can 100% say that there is several games' worth of Starfield content in one city in Cyberpunk than there is in one entire Starfield universe.
In the modern age of open world experiences, with all of the handcrafted beautiful worlds in games like Breath of the Wild, Subnautica, Red Dead Redemption 2, Xenoblade Chronicles, God of War 2018... I'm just so tired of procedural generation. It's outdated for open world games, there is absolutely no world in which procedural generation can top the worlds in video games now. Bethesda is behind on the times, they need a big change.
It kinda sucks, too, the initial look of Starfield was cool, but then you get into it, and...there's no real substance. While not having played it myself, I do still feel like it is my disappointment of the year 2023. It's not bad, just...disappointing. Like you said, it's fine, but they really dropped the ball.
How the hell could you even get into it if you hadn't played it??? Ah you got into it, then you started hearing the review bombing and like negative placebo you were scared off of it. That's the difference between you who is only feeling disappointment not because of the game itself, but because of the 100 millions of jealous ponies who review bombed it. And me who got into the game, played it, got effected by the review bombers, until realising what was going on, giving the finger to the fake review and being free from disappointment. It's good to not be cuckold by a trojan pony.
That game might get very very cool with proper mod support. Since most planets are empty, it seems like the perfect canvas for a world like The OASIS from Ready Player One.
7:58 Stephen...
certified georgDuck moment
Starfield is a good example of games that are “bigger” doesn’t mean it’s better.
I'm glad you are able to be honest with yourself about the game instead of forcing another Skyrim/Fallout 4. It sadly isn't the hit or evolution many wanted from Bethesda. Interest was there for the first few weeks, then said interest took a nosedive.
I think anytime I see a Starfield review, and I see people say that the planets are empty, amd the solar system is unsastisfying, I always have one recommendation: Outer Wilds (not The Outer Worlds, it's different).
I think that Outer Wilds is the best space game that exists. Its a VERY different game to Starfield, so if it's not your thing, then I get it, but to me, Outer Wilds is actually one of the greatest games ever, both conceptually, and in execution.
Outer Wilds is an open world, space exploration game, puzzle game, taking place in a fully and beautifully hand-crafted solar system. It's an indie game, which came out in 2019, and has one DLC which released in 2022
The progression is fully knowledge based, so once you know something, you can't un-know it, so please AVOID ALL SPOILERS, the game is best enjoyed when you know nothing.
A no-spoiler synopsis, is that you are the newest recruit of your home planet's astronaut program. What sets you apart, is that you're equpiied with a Nomai translator, which translates the language of an ancient alien species who used to livein the same solar system as you, but all thats left is the ruins of their society. You set out to uncover the secrets of the Nomai, and your solar system.
I TRULY can't recommend this game enough, it is so fantastic, and this is meant for anyone reading this comic, please give this game a try. It is, imo, the perfect space exploration game, and one of the best games ever.
Turns out 16x the size isn't necessarily better... and Starfield was 16x the 16x the 16x the size of fallout 4 and accomplishes nothing with it because there's nothing between points a, b, and c because you warp everywhere.
Agree with you. If anything, nothing ness makes it pretty worse
I'd say starfield is about two to three times the size of vanilla fallout 4 based solely on content & playtime,
& the warping/fast travelling is there to make the "nothing" in between entirely optional.
I have to disagree but each to their own.
I definitely agree the lack of exploration like we saw in Elder Scrolls and Fallout is Starfield's greatest fault
One run through of the game I committed myself to visiting every star system. I scanned every planet though I did not fully survey every planet, I tended to fully survey them occasionally and on a whim if there was a point of interest on the planet with a name that intrigued me. Surveying planets is a slog. Too many reused assets. Flora, Fauna, and structures tended to get old after the fifth time you've seen them.
There are several kinds of points of interest to discover some of them very interesting, but it did get repetitive pretty quickly. I especially liked it whenever a ship was detected in system, or there was a space station to explore as those had a higher chance to be unique or at least, not obviously common.
That's about the closest to natural exploration you get in this game compared to previous Bethesda titles.
I enjoyed ship combat, especially after putting some skill points into piloting (which unlocks strafing) and targeting (which unlocks targeting specific systems). Not really sure how I feel about those mechanics being gated behind skill points.
In general I think pumping in over a 1000 planets diluted the experience too far. It would have been better with like 10 planets or fewer that were fully fleshed out with multiple non-procedural settlements/cities and then _maybe_ some randomly populated planets with no hint of human presence whatsoever if you really need to sell that _final frontier_ feel.
This is probably the most positive review for this game that i’ve seen that is not from a paid reviewer (or someone who’s hyped up on a new game launch).
I didn’t even know the game was a thing until it released and what little I saw of it just made me think it’s not a game that i’d want to play. That sucks since a new Bethesda series would be cool but sadly this didn’t seem to hit the mark.
I’m glad you found some enjoyment in it at least.
The thing I enjoy the most out of your Let's Play is C.B. McCoy himself, if I think about it.
Love how you crafted a personality for your avatar.
Only way to pull more fun out of it would be to mess with a totally different character. With how well you did creating C.B. I'm sure you could, but I'd by no means expect you to do that on camera; just for personal interest.
Starfield's an interesting look at the current limits of A.I.-generated content, given that it can generate a decent amount of space, but the distribution of certain features feels way too 'even', like gas vents. The environment generation still has trouble making organic features over a wider area. Something I love about it was the character building. I love its perks/talents system and the return of initial character traits and such. I hope that continues to play into ES6.
I'm curious if the A.I. generation can be made to work as a side feature, like an expedition type radiant quest. I understand the concept they went for, using it to create Starfield's more logically-sized space experience, but I wonder if a more limited application would see better results.
I would love to see a Stephen and friends episode on Helldiver's 2; a 4 player co-op game that takes inspiration from Starship Troopers. It's also fairly cheap being only $40 but delivering in my opinion a value far greater than most AAA games priced at $60 or $70.
When a game like this comes out, I usually wait for a significant price reduction or sale before I buy it. With series I've played before, like Elder Scrolls, I get it close to the release date. You can usually depend on the modding community to fix any major or minor glitches and problems with Bethesda games.
Starfield was never my cup of tea genre-wise (I much prefer things like TES), but I wanted to at least watch some gameplay cause I knew that this would pave the way for what to expect with TES6. There are aspects that I sincerely hope will be ironed out and carried over--the floating/anti-gravity/jetpack combat, for example. It makes me hope that levitation magic will come back in the next Elder Scrolls, cause clearly the coding is there. It's obviously possible for them to do. I also liked the idea of picking a background that affects some of your skills from the start. It's a great way to flesh out your character and give roleplaying opportunities.
That being said, I agree that Bethesda really needs to take a look at what people considered boring or bad about Starfield and learn from it. Open world games should allow for choice and exploration. There shouldn't be a definitive 'right' way to play, beyond having as much fun as you can with it. And to those who genuinely had a good time with it, that's great!
100% agree.
I'm probably going to be a bit harsher, having extremely fond memories of Skyrim around launch and a decent experience with Fallout 4, I jumped into Starfield with "Bethesda" Expectations. Knowing it was going to be buggy, but as long as I enjoy myself it'll be fun.
I slogged through Starfield, 40 hours of being bored out of my mind, rushing the main story, trying to do side quests to find any redeeming quality, and I sadly didn't find it. I'm glad there are some people who enjoyed it, but for me. This was the worst game I've played in years, if I wanted to play Oblivion. I'll go play Oblivion, not some $70 unoptimized HD Space Oblivion.
But again. I'm thrilled that there are some people who enjoyed it.
There is actually a *small* amount of natural discovery, namely on the scale of cities, since while in a city you mostly do have to run from your current objective to the next with relatively little fast travel, and the other part is something I mentioned before with how Starfield is kinda trying to be the quintessential Bethesda experience cutting off everything else, so while it cut out the travel which lead to the natural discovery, it still tries to keep the discovery element by occasionally throwing a more or less random event at you when you arrive. Random pirates are there to attack you, or there's a distress signal or whatever.
So it's kinda like they cut out what they felt was unnecessary and tried to keep important bit, not really seeing how the "unnecessary" part is kinda what made it important. It's why I've said before that Starfield feels like it's missing the soul of a Bethesda game. Starfield does make me *very* curious about how Elder Scrolls 6 will be, because IMO there's two big potential routes: Todd either learns from this, sees the opinions on the game, etc. and strives to understand the players better, making ES6 potentially amazing, or Todd doubles down and we won't see anything coming close to Skyrim for a very long time.
In the meantime, if you ever feel like you want to play a Bethesda-style RPG for some reason, I'd love to recommend Kingdom Come: Deliverance. It wasn't made by Bethesda, but it's very much the same style of open world RPG with pretty good writing, and a very interesting combat system.
Starfield isn't a sequel to fallout 4 nor skyrim. That alone can clear up a lot of confusion. It's similar but different, & it was always going to be due to the setting.
Starfield absolutely has the soul, or the spirit, of a Bethesda game. The care & attention to detail is there in (almost!) every aspect of the game.
Not saying your opinion is wrong at all, but in my opinion starfield +dlc will be every bit as great as skyrim or fo4, & there's no reason to be concerned for ES6.
@@skyriminspace We know it's not a sequel to Skyrim, but it is still the same type of game, a Bethesda open world RPG. People's problem isn't with the setting, it's how the game ended up.
A lot of the design choices simply make the game way less fun than it could've been, Stephen's point about the natural discovery is one of the biggest examples of this, and the fact someone like him, who 100%-ed both Skyrim and FO4 because he loved them, feels like game is just passable shows clearly that Starfield very much went in the wrong direction.
A lot of parts of the game definitely have the great Bethesda quality we love, but there's more than enough problems where it's missing, I don't see any way for it to become on par with Skyrim at all.
Even on the technical side, as Stephen mentioned there's still bugs that have been part of Bethesda games for many games now, and while some of them are just harmless and funny which IMO should actually stay, in Stephen's LP there's multiple quests that got bugged couldn't be completed even after all this time since release, and these are not randomly generated radiant quests.
@@The_Intelligent_One i'm generalising of course. There are so many people who act like starfield IS a sequel to those older games, just because it's by the same studio!
Yeah, i totally agree about the natural discovery being a tiny part of starfield, in comparison to older games. I wish they'd made large handcrafted areas surrounding NA or AC. Maybe a route to another settlement? I miss following a road just to see where it leads like in Skyrim.
Early on i wasn't having such a good time with starfield, but i leaned into the familiar parts, found out how epic ship building & photo mode can be, & i was off! I hope more people come around as dlc arrives. There is a great game here somewhere, despite the undeniable flaws!
Do you think you'd ever play some of bg3? like obviously not 100% there is so much in that game, but even as a first 20 or stephen and friends? I really recommend multiplayer with friends it is SO much fun!
I think this game is a really interesting look into who bethesda is as a company. because there were multiple ways to learn the lesson of bigger isn't better, and they've literally learned this lesson before. Both Arena and Daggerfall are way bigger than Morrowind, but aren't fun to explore because most of the continent is just randomly generated terrain between cities. They realized this and that's why Morrowind was scaled down, so each locale was unique and fun to find. Plus there's No Man's Sky which made literally the exact same mistake Starfield did like 7-8 years ealier.
But the people who like NMS love it. & the people who like starfield love it.
Isn't it ok for people to like different things?
@@skyriminspaceI never said you couldn't like those games, if you do more power to ya. I think it's just interesting to view the actions of Bethesda with this stuff in mind.
@@fayerunestarfield made no mistakes. It was review bombed by jealous ponies. Also by r@cists, and star citizen ufo investors. Then the appeasers of toxic zombie ponies, reddead r@cists, ufo investors joined in and gave their nipple of attention to their cry bully babies.
That's why Dr Disrespect liked it, while simp wimp peon types found the game too hard and joined those who prefer being ridden by a trojan pony.
Hearing about the no natural discovery is just making think that Bethesda saw the love that Outer Worlds got and thought they could do it by just making a space game, without any consideration as to why it was good
Starfield, to me, epitomizes an observation that I’ve had for a long time about video games that try to aim for hyper-realism. Not a bad goal, but I think it’s a mistake to act like it’s the key to ~immersion~ or whatever. In practice, pooling tons of resources into the visuals AND the scale of things makes for a deadly combination that creates what I call “empty detail” or stuff you can’t do anything with. Because then there’s less room for technical polish, clever design, quality of life changes, and even passable writing. It’s like building a huge custom bookcase and then only putting like 5 books on it. You gotta appropriately match the container to the content.
Starfield isn't very realistic at all. The spaceships behave more like submarines than actual spacecraft.
@@skyriminspace haha I guess it is somewhat of a space fantasy rather than sci fi. Which I’m fine with personally. I mean hyper-realism as it applies to visual art, though
@@lindenbug oh yeah i agree with you.
They obviously poured effort into the ship building stuff. Sometimes i just wander around in my ship checking out all the tiny details. & i actually do follow the guy's advice & check the outside for heat leech nests every couple of landings!
I'm kinda curious on how Stephen would like Cyberpunk 2077. I feel like it does a lot of the things Starfield tried to do but a lot better. Probably not the type of thing you would typically have on his channel, but maybe it would be a fun experience.
Agreed. They need to focus more on quality and not quantity hence the size of the game
really cool to hear your thoughts on the game stephen. I couldn't get into the game myself (mostly because it was poorly optimized on pc, and also it didn't seem that fun), but i think "it's fine" is a reasonable takeaway
do think a lot of people who went in blind might've had a "less than fine" perception of the game though, since they didn't ask other people where to find the fun
@@gonzy_estavezcould be the other way around actually.
Online discourse has a funny way of predisposing players towards a good or bad experience with new games.
It took them 8 YEARS to do that, too. 8 years, and I find myself playing Fallout 4, Skyrim, and Morrowind. Sad. And then to use the "Disney Defense" and say it's the fans that are at fault because the product is great is worrying, to say the least.
It is the sony pony fans fault. They should get an xbox and stop review bombing it
I included the Ryujin quests and enjoyed them. I’m not the best at stealth but sometimes I enjoy them as a challenge.
Overall I enjoyed the game, but it didn’t me grab me enough to replay for 2-3 years like I did Skyrim and Fallout 4 and Bioshock.
stephen, if you’d like to play a story-based sci-fi series, i’d love to see you play mass effect ! it’s an older game series, very enjoyable with choices that feel like they matter . there’s 3 games + a spin-off (haven’t played the spin-off but heard mixed opinions). it’s a great time, amazing characters, combat that evolves from game-to-game, and a similar character creation to starfield in terms of character backgrounds !
there’s a very likely chance you have played it or seen it, but i would love to see your approach or thoughts on it!! ^^
Mass effect? Yuck.
@@UmmerFarooq-wx4yo what’s wrong with it ? :0
@@fr0ggisoup its awful blue grey colour scheme through out. It also has that feel of a trash 70s daytime American soap opera. Note the cover of 'Time' January 12, 1976. And you will literally find it in the Mass Effect Citadel DLC.
*shudders* eww
@@UmmerFarooq-wx4yo i get what you mean about the coloring but it isn't exactly a recent game lol. to each their own, i found the character driven story interesting, didn't see how it was relatable to a soap opera given the whole political drama aspect .
My brother mentioned the reason they didn't put a map in was because it would be hard to make a map of places that procedurally generate. It'd be way nice if it was for the big cities, but maybe Bethesda was like "nah we've put enough into this"
I also still resent comparing Starfield to Oblivion in any manner 😛
This is the most accurate review lol. It’s just fine. Not bad, not good, meh. C tier for sure. Honestly, D tier for making me walk and no mini maps.
You’ve got a lot of really good points but it’s space. It’s not always sapposed to be interesting. I’m sure most planets and moons out there are actually quite boring. When you say it needs to be interesting within 40 seconds of walking somewhere to add content? Are you a dopamine fiend? Like common, just play and enjoy the rocks and the views, that’s what I like. You just get lost on a moon somewhere with nothing and it feels great! That’s just me though.
The problem going into Starfield that I feel so many had was they were thinking it was going to be some "generation defining" title. Self-proclaimed overhype and forgetting it's a Bethesda title (as they have a very distinct approach to RPGs) definitely sabotaged people's impressions. I thoroughly enjoyed the game because of the expectations I set for myself going in, but I do agree that there are a lot of gameplay and design choices that are heavily questionable given their track record with their other IPs.
Yeah, to me I feel the bar for open world games and rpgs has been raised to new heights and bethesda is lagging behind. Maybe it's not fair to play a comparison game, but as a consumer when i spend 60-70 dollars on games like Elden Ring, Tears of the Kingdom, and Baldur's Gate 3, it makes it hard to appreciate whatever Bethesda tried to do with this game. They used to be the golden standard for open world games and now it feels like they are just behind the times. If this was a lesser known studio the game being "mid" would hurt a lot less. Not to mention No Man's Sky, that feels more in line with whatever this game was trying to accomplish with its "1000" planets. Sad for sure. I hope they learn from this and other games and give us that magic experience we want with ES6
"That magic experience" has a lot more to do with the player's own expectations than a lot of people think.
I still recall playing skyrim on my ps3 in November 2011. It was like someone had designed a video game just for me. I get the exact same feeling from starfield,
+ as a bonus the characters/writing/voice acting is light years improved which more than anything makes the world feel alive.
Not saying your opinion is invalid at all, just that there are those of us out here who really found the fun in starfield.
@@skyriminspace fair point friend!
One of my special interests right now is Starfield and the overwhelming nothingness it provides. I wanted to love it, I tried to like it, but ultimately it fell short. The lack of design document and the attitude of "no ideas are bad ideas" caused the game to be an unguided mess, from the writing and quests, to the mechanics, and even the aesthetics between cities. I could seriously write an essay on it
There is a design document. Go to Bethesda's website & somewhere on there it specifically mentions the use of "an internal developer wiki".
It's how they can make a believable self-referencing world that doesn't contradict itself.
The writing (not to mention voice acting) in starfield is the best of any Bethesda game since morrowind.
@@skyriminspacethese pony bots don't even need a running pc.
The next Bethesda game will probably not even come with gameplay in the base game, they will just wait for modders to "fix it"
Only 70 hours? Hope to see you in the stars again.
Your thoughts echo mine pretty well. It was just a really big, boring game. Like a very "Cs get degrees" approach to game design mixed with complete apathy from anyone who had to build resources for the game. I'd be fascinated to get Alex's take from a game design perspective
Really?! I see real passion everywhere i go in starfield.
Did you watch that 45 minute "starfield direct"? Those people were about as far from apathetic as possible & it shows up in their work.
The game isn't perfect. (Hell, it's not even finished until dlc arrives). But to the right kind of player it's a great game.
I think people saying bad or abysmal because if compared to an average game it's mid and average, but for a Bethesda title it was bad
Bethasda titles are mid and average though and have been for quite some time. They are just dressed up in a lot of makeup. It’s well done makeup, but it’s makeup nonetheless.
I agree. I would also add that this game has a ton of illusion of choice. It has the same issue as Fallout 4, which is that it's a first person shooter with a few RPG elements thrown in. When you're given dialogue options, they rarely ever lead to different outcomes - it's effectively just giving you multiple ways of reaching the same conclusion. That was probably the biggest disappointment for me, after they used the new dialogue system as a selling point.
It's definitely... Just fine. I got probably 60-70% through the story, put it down one day, then never felt like picking it up again. There are certainly some awesome segments, but, for me, this game has no staying power. I'll wait until the DLC releases before uninstalling, but my hopes aren't super high, if I'm being honest.
I knew it was over once he said over 1000 planets. They also have to stop with the radiant quests.
I REALLY hope they learn from Starfield. Skyrim was the first game that I was *Excited* to play. I hope Elder Scrolls 6 is just an improved Skyrim 😂❤
While I appreciate the Let's Play a lot, I can relate to your thoughts about it.
Thanks for putting your réflexion out there !
Like others have said before, weirdly enough this releasing after Bomb Rush Cyberfunk was pretty bad, since Bomb Rush is a game soley focused on making movement fun, for those who played both having to slowly run in barren wastelands was made so much worse after pulling off trick combos in BRC
hi StephenVlog
Honestly, to me, the best part about Starfield is that it was finally released.
So now the next Elder Scrolls game can finally come out.
Can't wait for Elders Scroll to have a few thousand planets just like starfield with flying horses and isekai.
I wish Bethesda would create a new mission per week and add to the game. Like, populate a planet and put a crisis on it that the player needs to resolve, like a Star Trek Original TV Show episode. That would generate lasting sales for years.
It would just turn into a mobile game garbage pile though. Just doing “weeklies” out of obligation for people that genuinely like the game and everybody else would stop playing quickly.
One of my biggest gripes with Starfield has also been the very limited sense of discovery. Well, there really isn't one, is there? It just feels very linear, which is strange for a game like Starfield where you kind of expect it to be open-world. At least for the most part. Most of it also just felt very copy-paste? Like, the NPCs, for instance. The little girls in the game all looked the same. Literally The Same. Some quests were too buggy to play and they were boring as hell. It felt very unimaginative and definitely lowered the overall quality and enjoyment of the game for me.
I played 10 minutes of it. Thought gunplay was pretty good actually! Ended up just thinking wow... This is a Fallout 4 reskin.... and never played again
I've never watched the Skyrim or Fallout playthroughs because, while Stephen's commentary is great, I just find the settings of those games so uninteresting that it doesn't grip me. By contrast, Starfield was a setting that actually did grab my attention. It's just a shame the overarching plot really didn't live up to that setting.
I thought this was Max Scoville..I honestly thought he went solo for the fourth time lol
As glitchy as it was at launch, Cyberpunk 2077 really changed how I view open world games. Actually, Xenoblade did it first for me I guess, but for the more shooter RPG style of games like Starfield, Cyberpunk is just... on another level. So many details. So many unique quest strings. So many world-building moments, good customization, the authentic feeling of going wherever you want on the map naturally... it took them a bit, but they really made Cyberpunk something special. I haven't played it after the newest big update and the DLC, but the fact that I'm SO eager to totally start over and start a new campaign to see the DLC and new gameplay stuff should say something. If you haven't played it yet, I highly recommend it!!
Cyberpunk doesn't have spacex in 2077. It's also a small map.
Can't believe Pokémon games had better senses of exploration than a game by the SKYRIM devs (both SCVI or Legends Arceus could go here depending on your personal opinions on those games, or you could just disagree with me, that's fine too)
I know youre not a reaction channel, but i would at least love to see a review video if you plan on watching the Fallout Tv show
I would love to see Stephen and friends doing hell drivers
I did not enjoy starfield much at all and quit early on. I also did not love fallout 4 all that much however I have a hundred or so hours with it. I don’t know if these types of games work much for me anymore because even the outer worlds which had a lot better reviews and js by obsidian which are supposed to be better at making Bethesda games than Bethesda but it is just okay to me. I think that maybe these types of games don’t lend themselves well to the current game market in the way that companies make games nowadays if that makes sense. Idk maybe it’s just me
I'm honestly glad you didn't go the Skyrim/Fallout thing for this, I was concerned it'd become another albatross for you.
tbf there's barely any content so it wouldn't take that long lmao
I bought a Series X to give Starfield my best shot and, goodness, it was probably my worst gaming purchase in a very long time. I watched the Skyrim LP religiously when it came out and did the same for the Fallout 4 LP for a time before I fell off of it. I did try to watch a few of this one's LP, but I just really did not care to watch it as the bad taste from trying it myself and genuinely disliking it after awhile lingered. I really do not think that Bethesda has what it takes to do games with the cultural impact as Skyrim anymore after Fallout 76 and now Starfield. They rested on their laurels for far too long and forgot what made Skyrim great. Gaming in general's insane push for $100 million games and all-eggs-in-one-basket type games like Bethesda was doing with Starfield and Rockstar is doing with GTA VI is very much an all or nothing approach and I really do feel like they could've had a better, more concise Starfield and Elder Scrolls VI out in the time it took for them to put out the current Starfield. There just was WAY too much scope and not even remotely enough quality for that scope going on. 11 years between entries is far too long. I bailed on Starfield and tried Cyberpunk 2077, and I can 100% say that there is several games' worth of Starfield content in one city in Cyberpunk than there is in one entire Starfield universe.
I think I gave up on this game after about 8 hours. I’ll never play it just based on everything I heard about it.
sooo after starfield anyone still hyped for next elder scrolls game or naw?
In the modern age of open world experiences, with all of the handcrafted beautiful worlds in games like Breath of the Wild, Subnautica, Red Dead Redemption 2, Xenoblade Chronicles, God of War 2018... I'm just so tired of procedural generation. It's outdated for open world games, there is absolutely no world in which procedural generation can top the worlds in video games now. Bethesda is behind on the times, they need a big change.
shirt algorithm comment
It kinda sucks, too, the initial look of Starfield was cool, but then you get into it, and...there's no real substance. While not having played it myself, I do still feel like it is my disappointment of the year 2023. It's not bad, just...disappointing. Like you said, it's fine, but they really dropped the ball.
How the hell could you even get into it if you hadn't played it???
Ah you got into it, then you started hearing the review bombing and like negative placebo you were scared off of it.
That's the difference between you who is only feeling disappointment not because of the game itself, but because of the 100 millions of jealous ponies who review bombed it. And me who got into the game, played it, got effected by the review bombers, until realising what was going on, giving the finger to the fake review and being free from disappointment. It's good to not be cuckold by a trojan pony.
It’s a good time waster. 👍
Really feel they overhyped and overpromised this game, hence the general underwhelming view.
I agree... it's abysmal.
6/10 all fail. I mean fair
That game might get very very cool with proper mod support. Since most planets are empty, it seems like the perfect canvas for a world like The OASIS from Ready Player One.