Twenty star systems with more stuff on the planets and moons would've been much more sensible than the thousands of empty worlds they created. Such a strange decision 🤔
U should work at Bethesda, it’s obvious they made « systems » and « planets/worlds » on the daily basis but didn’t bothered include « stuff » to their galactic empty game
I think it was the 'cheap' decision. Automated content costs less money and requires far less resources. BGS is stuck in a 1990's/2000's mentality where stuff like that was accepted or they just don't want to spend the money on it.
Imagine the difference it could've made to have a fog of war over the star map. Legitimately allow a player to "explore". Such a cheap and easy addition. It wouldn't fix everything but it would at least allow for genuine space exploration. Hide everything you haven't travelled to. Limit fast travel until you visit at least 1 planet in a new system.
the problem really is the 1k worlds feel like nothing other than 1k small rooms with loading screens between them that randomly generate roughly same room but with a new colour pallet over and over again
Literally just 3 planets (one per faction) would have been completely fine. And even when you are on a far off, dead moon. The moment you exit your ship, there's tons of facilities all over the surface, spaced apart every 500m. I don't even think you can find a completely empty moon
In a time where Blood & Wine, Phantom Liberty and Shadow of the Erdtree exist and have set the bar for what DLC for AAA games can be Shattered Space is an embarrassment.
Unfortunately, they're still too small after leaving Hodd's Creation Club and unless they persevere like Running with Scissors with this new IP, it may not work well when the "latest" work is The Outer Worlds with fancier graphics and the same price tag.
What really disappointed me was the shallowness of the story and the lack of integration with the base game. It doesn't matter whether you picked the good or bad ending of the DLC. There are no consequences. No mention of anything if you picked the bad ending, apart from the Lodge members being angry with you. Good ending? Might as well have never happened. And don't get me started on lore. In Skyrim, you still have TH-camrs making videos about Skyrim lore and "things you might not know". Starfield? EpicNate did ONE video before the game launched but didn't do any other videos, because Bethesda decided to take the lazy way out and use fragments of Dickens books. The lore is even shallower than the dialogue from those moo people in New Atlantis who don't even have a dialogue tree.
Honestly, the first time I've heard this referred to as cut content. 100% agree. Appreciate your honesty. It wasn't great, but it certainly felt undercooked.
And so true, Starfield always felt like it was biting off more than it could chew. And i dont think any DLC could address that. Unless they went full Cyberpunk and dropped something like Phantom Liberty but they keep doubling down on their outdated game design and so it ends up being a hollow game. A fun concept but poorly executed because they wanted to have so much of it instead of just condensing it into a much smaller game with a small bunch of unique planets and unique variety in the gameplay which would have been a lot more value than targeting a big scope of procedurally generated nothingness.
@@swellerace Phantom Liberty won DLC of the year last year and skyrocketed Cyberpunk sales alongside when Edgerunners launched so you can keep telling yourself otherwise but the facts speak for themselves. Cyberpunk was dead in the water after their abysmal 2020 launch but in 2023 they listened and made the necessary changes and boom they were able to leave that project with their heads held high. Bethesda keeps refusing to listen to what their customer base wants and so Starfield missed the opportunity to have their DLC make the kind of dent that Phantom Liberty made.
@@TheOnlyTaps meaning what It didn't make the charts like gta 5 or fornite and didn't you hear that cd projekt red went woke with dei so i wouldn't be supporting them for too much longer or bethesda!
While I agree there are issues, but as a space exploration game I have really enjoyed it and have 2000 hrs and have played shattered space 3 times.. To see how different decisions played out. I enjoy building ships and outposts, and ship battles. The mods that are coming out, as always address some of the deficits that I found. What I wished was better is the character development over all and fleshing out andrejas history in dazra in the DLC . Feels like a big miss in a DLC focused on the varuun. Also wished that the choices you made ie starting the serpents crusade had an impact on the settled systems as you play. I do think the new companions were a good addition, especially sahima.. Really brings varuun culture to your crew and she is interesting. At the end of the day I find starfield to be an open with loads of possibility, and really hope Bethesda and the modding community capitolize on this more!
In No Man's Sky, your ship is an actual vehicle by which you explore the game with, fly around planets and pick and choose your landing spots. In Starfield, your ship is a glorified loading screen loader that allows you to appear in the orbit of planets and decide where to land from there. It's not a vehicle, but a box by which you load another skybox. You can't do anything with your space ship other than fight other ships and sink credits to make it better at fighting other ships. You can't trade goods because of how merchants work, you don't need to make it fast to deliver messages to places and there are no quests that involve your ship because the developers didn't want players creativity getting in the way of quest design. Starfield is just Fallout 4 with slightly better graphics set in space.
I am once again posting "obscenities" until you talk about Mafia. Let's face it, Stanfield was just boring. I forgot the DLC was a thing despite briefly covering it during the Xbox showcase earlier this year
Starfield had a lot of problens actually. Bland Worlddesign, Abysmal Lore, underused 3D Combat, Booooooooring writing, Plotholes, clear Lack of internal vision and communication and just genuine unambitiousness and lack of care. Shattered Space adressed ONE of these problems. MAYBE. The world. The other ones are still very much there, and they didn't even make an interesting world.
In Skyrim towns' defense, they are based on medieval towns, a lot of which were no bigger than 2x3 blocks, so you can suspend your disbelief much easier than vs a "Utopian" megacity that's only 2 blocks long.
Especially when other games have accustomed us to traverse large modern and futuristic cities. Small towns are very frequent in medieval RPGs, so it's easier to accept it.
I gave you like for your comment on weapons. You're the first TH-camr who isn't pathologically obsessed with guns in the game and all you care about is whether your gun is effective in killing enemies. That makes you an actual RPG player, not a pseudo RPG player who thinks Starfield is CoD clone.
It's the writing and the engine. Both of which are kind of important (sarcasm). The writing is dime store novel junk. Cardboard cutout characters. Uninteresting fetch quests. There is nothing about the tech that prevented Bethesda from writing good stories. They just chose to write bland, milquetoast stuff. Maybe they really think the writing is good? That would be scary. The engine is what brings down the gameplay loop. Loading screen after loading screen. A ship that you really don't actually pilot. Not even joystick support. The same 30 POIs cut and pasted across the galaxy. That is not procedural generation. That is 30 odd things, hand crafted, and then cut and pasted everywhere. The planets are the same. The same flora and fauna cut and pasted everywhere. For all of that, I got my money's worth out of the core game. UC and CF quest lines were fun. After the March release, combined with mods, combat started to get fun. I like ship building, even if I can't do much with the ship that I have built. I got $70 worth of entertainment out of the game. But I do not feel like I want more of the same. What I got really wasn't good enough to make me want to come back. Massively rewrite or port to a new engine. Make space flight a thing. Remove POIs entirely for all I care. Rewriting existing story lines probably won't happen, but it should. At a minimum, raise the quality of new story lines. Then I'll come back. For now, NFW I am paying $30 for more bad writing.
Everything Starfield has(except for ship customisation) Warframe has exactly that. By Bethesda logic Warframe is an open world space exploration RPG. Infact I like Warframe's ship fights better
7:30 you nailed my biggest issue with Starfield, Bethesda and their engine. Since Morowind, all they "cities" were villages...but you can run trough the whole province of Skyrim in ten minutes (tried that). But when everything is small, it doesnt stick out so much. But when you have whole 1:1 sized planets, which are empty. What I really fail to understand, why they did not work around this. Why not make Jemison restricted? You can just land in spaceport the Constellation has license for using. Then slap some love poly skyscrappers in the background, put big city lights on the planet texture during night and just like that, it feels believable. Whyt there are not more rigs visible on bacground on Volii (Neon)? By letting you explore Jemison and other planets, and finding there is nothing there, they willingly break their own illusion...
Why are there not more riggs on Volii? Because the umbrella tech to harness the constant lightning is made by one failing corporation who just sits on the patent. The lore isn't as empty as you all like to complain about.
@@badman564 And why does the city need to by powered exclusively by lightning? This is the universe with compact and safe fusion power. But even if there was a solid lore reason, its once again lore hurting the immersion, not the other way around. Right now, there is this so called "pleasure city", which is notorious tourist destination, yet is so small it has literaly two landing pads, one permanently occupied by your ship. And if your game/engine/devs cant handle bigger cities, would not it be better to handwave it by lore, the there are other rigs around?
@@lihkan there's a solid lore reason, you just chose to ignore it. The tech is needed because the amount and power of strikes. The company that made it didn't have the resources to make another, but they refuse to share the patent because it's the only invention they have. This is all explained in-universe, with spoken dialogue, and environmental storytelling (not just logs). This is common amongst this community. You complain about "muh no lore" while ignoring the lore.
@@badman564 I am aware of this, but you miss my point. What I am trying to say is that Bethesda lore in Starfield clashes with the level design, and it should be other way around. Especially if you have completely new franchise. If you cant create convincingly sized city, why write a lore that says there are no other rigs on the planet, when existence of the other rigs would be the simplest way how to reconcile the size of Neon with the its role in the world?
@@lihkan No I saw your point, I don't agree. I don't think it's "solution" to change the lore of a planet to fix an imagined "scale" problem (a nitpick on a tech limitation), while labeling it a design issue and ignoring both gameplay and lore reasons for the original decision. Apparently in a universe with rampant piracy and danger, they would want to build more drug factories, lowering the price of a drug that they also have exclusive rights for and currently control the market. Like it's all owned by megacorps, who engage in horrible trade practices, they talk about creating fake scarcity for higher profits in the game. Lol Also, let's be real, what were y'all expecting with the cities, cus I got exactly what I thought. Remember Diamond City and it's 20 residents? You have to see the writing on the walls, it's never gonna be a live city. It's always gonna be a facsimile of one. I've frankly been enjoying getting back into it. You start to catch small things people say that add to the universe in really unique ways. Example, Listen for how many people talk about how "space is too dangerous", and it becomes clear that most people rarely go to space. And when you take into account the lack of FTL communications, it solidifies the general isolation between the various planets. I think there's a lot more under the surface, making for a really unique setting and universe. But almost all of the "improvements" I hear from YTs and comments would largely make it more like other sci-fi. And mind you, I'm not just simping. I think there were missteps which hurt the tone, and it's clear to me that there was behind the scenes meddling going on, which imo made the game more generic. Look at the Lack of Gore, which ruins the tone in many areas. Terrormorphs were hurt by this tremendously, and are more generic as a result.
You've raised a good question regarding the solitary small towns on empty planets. Why would people have to travel to another world far away, when there's so much space on each planet? is that hand waved away in the game or what?
Ohhh Starfield! Such potential... how you promised us we would "reach the stairs," but failed to deliver. Honestly the zero G combat is all I do in starfield.
Elderscrolls & Fallout have smaller cities/towns and it makes sense, In the nuclear war would cause settlements to have less people and be smaller, the same with less techanogically advanced times like those of obiviion and skyrim.. I still think starfield should've been our solar system as a centre and surrounded by honeycomb shaped solar systems for the main game and expanding it for dlc, it would've made more sense for how long the game took over the years spent on an empty universe
It’s so crazy that BGS was once my favorite game studio. I loved Skyrim and Fallout 4. But then Fallout 76, A subscription service for it, and then Starfield. Sigh.
Perfectly described, Starfield is very boring. They could have done more for the base game and the dlc, but like you said, it looks more like cut content. Great video btw, i like a lot your videos, keep up the good work. 👌
You mention magenta - one game I really like (because it is FUN, though it is not critically acclaimed) is The Outer Worlds. The big problem with it is the magenta! Magenta everywhere - it is quite sickly to look at.
I’m an obsidian super fan and made it through about 30 minutes of the Outer Worlds due to how insanely ugly it was. It didn’t help that the worldbuilding was purely absurd and satirical and didn’t try to earnestly do anything interesting that I could see.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces Well, I respect your point of view, obviously. And I am not going to argue about its ugly visuals. It's not just the magenta everywhere, but the armour is hideous! You can't wear anything that looks nice with any protection till late in the game. I don't mind the character models - I think they are fine, except that they do tend to be a bit 'samey'. And yet once I bought it, I played it through and immediately started new playthrough. I never do that! I just found the action/discovery balance was good, the dialogue funny (not deep - just funny). It's all pretty broad. But sometimes that's just what I want. I should confess that I'm an older gamer. Decades older than the average! Don't want to make a big deal of it, but it is relevant. Because I'm not looking for a challenge. I'm not interested in 'gitting gud'! I don't have any peers to impress or discuss tactics with - my friends are not gamers, to say the least. So I suppose I just like it because it is simple escapist fun. I really enjoyed Fallout London (finished it two days ago - just under 200hrs.), but it took a lot of work to get it running, and at low levels it can be quite punishing. And the quests (when they are working) can be pretty convoluted. Outer Worlds is nothing like that - it's just simple fun. I like it, but if they make a new one (there is talk), I hope they bring in a better visual designer, amongst other things.
@@ZachariahJ Interesting perspective and I see your point. I’ll keep it in mind in case I consider another playthrough. To slightly restate my point, I think the tone is what really bothered me. New Vegas felt like it struck a nice balance between the zany satire in Fallout and some very serious tones. The Outer Worlds felt like pure satire, which I find harder to get immersed in if that makes sense.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces I did set the bar pretty low for Outer Worlds! I've stopped playing many games because something bugged me - Dead Space 3, even Red Dead 2! (Arthur was fine, but his gang were idiots, and I kept away from them - but I had to join them to do missions, which I didn't enjoy). The Outer Worlds does wear its heart on its sleeve. I'm OK with that. (In fact the forced attempts at 'balance' tend to jar a bit, for me, tbh.) Best to think of it as a B-movie, rather than a quality video game! I got it in a Steam sale, and I think that is appropriate. ;-)
Ign which are sony pony lovers gave both star field and shattered space a 7/10. They were amongst the only ones to give starfield a low score like that. Seeing as how the 100 million active sony playstation users ponied up and review bombed starfield constantly from before its released (but were laughed at and exposed for not playing the game) and continued until they had held the gaming community hostage suffering Stockholm syndrome appeasement and then indignation against starfield, that indignation made the gaming community demand that starfield was suddenly going to launch a cyberpunk sized city all over a giant planet with minute potato physics. Mind you, the "dlc" was already paid for by those who paid full price for the game. Poverty folks got a cheaper option.
The funny part to me is that in so many ways I feel like Mass Effect (especially 2) did the world building better. Sure the levels were fairly small, but they felt lived in. You could look out beyond the boundaries of the playable area and imagine the lives of people living in the universe even if you couldn't go there
Bethesda games are their own genre at this point. If you didn't want a Bethesda game in space, then why did you buy it?? lmao Anyways, can't wait to preorder the next TES game.
The game is passable, until with get another Space Game from another game Developer which offers the same as StarField and more. But until that day arrives, StarField is the only Space Game on Console which offers Ship , Base building, Third Person Create You Own Character, with a Story and lots of side quests and lots of places to explore (Even Though they are Generated) So until we get another Space Game on The Consoles, this is an original take, which Bethesda alone attempted to create.
This game feels to me like it suffers from poor adaption of concept to actual game. Like they wanted a cool space game during the pioneering times of humanities space exploration, but they didnt realize to adapt that idea to a game format you NEED to have more density and pois than there would ever be in a realistic scenario. Its not a movie where the image of a barren landscape is emotional and atmospheric. The player is sitting there looking at it and now like ok what am i doing. If they made a LOTR game open world and realistically sized it would be miserable to experience, theres nothing but ruins forest fields and mountings in most the land. But in a movie format they make it interesting with scenery shots roll images and music and montages of the main character’s progression.
@@badman564 I mean at least there would be more than 100m tall hills. Im sure most people can feel something from looking at a landscape. But again poor adaptation to its format. Theres very little uniqueness to the landscape from planet to planet. Because the terrain generator just doesnt have that much to work with. Desolate planets also have monumental formations like olympus monz or canyons the size of countries. But non of thats in starfield, just endless generated dunes and hills with some rocks and variously generated shaders. You can actually look at the landscape of fallout or elder scrolls and feel something. And astronaut can look at a dune and feel something cause they’re there. But a camera of a dune is limited in enjoyment. Its like they half understand that you need to populate the world with something because they have 1000s of ships landing at random spots aimlessly and taking off all over the planet if you take the density you see to the scale of the whole planet. But then they have a fraction of the buildings or pois needed for that kind of traffic. It somehow feels like playing the first hour of fallout 4 over and over and over again without getting any further into the story where you see the same locations and events 100 times within 2 hours of play, but theyre all 5 times farther apart than they need to be.
Bethesda needs new management, Starfield does still for me have the magic of what Bethesda can still offer but the whole procedural design for the planets was a dumb idea. Wish they could have done instead what Mass Effect / Destiny did, just a hand full of plantes instead of their dumb 120 destination with hundreds of planets with nothing to do . Respect Todd Howard but his vision for what Bethesda games should be has hit a road block since Skyrim, went from morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3 to Skyrim…then look how they have fallen, fo4 (its ok but a major disappointment after Skyrim, fallout 76 to now starfield. Before the DLC I had starfiled at a low 80s, after the DLC i have to settle it a mid 70s. The dlc for me made the game worse with its technical issues, so much stuttering after i installed the DLC. I’m around 110 hrs n need one mission left to wrap up Starfield and the few times i enjoyed it , it was a blast but so many bad design choices and the constant load screen makes Starfield one of those gaming disappointment . Was hoping Shatter space would be like the cyberpunk DLC, fix issues and do things better than before but went backwards. Hope they learn their lesson but we are 3 games in a row were they keep doing backwards instead of forward.
Idk maybe I wasn't playing starfeild right. I couldn't really get into it. Maybe it's me. That being said I've enjoyed your take on the game. I'll g8ve it another go one day tho
Same. I have started maybe 3 or 4 playthroughs on both my Xbox and PC over the course of a year and I haven't been able to complete at least one playthrough before I lose interest and play something else. I have over 1000 hours in pretty much every Fallout game bar 1, 2 and 76 and have probably triple that in each Elder Scrolls game since Morrowind. Just extremely disappointing. Bethesda used to be great, but those things it was great at have been innovated and implemented better in other games by other studios since. Now Bethesda is just a stark definition of shallow mediocrity.
The underwhelming aspect of Bethesda games is something that worries me. When after having saved the world in Oblivion I strongly remember the underwhelming feeling when realizing there where like 3 other dudes there cheering me on. At the time this was brushed off since the technical obstacles were apparent, but all these years later they are still kind of there. GTA5 has been out for a long time now. We've all seen whats possible, the cat's out of the bag. I fear however that Bethesda are woefully left behind in this matter, and I'm fairly certain that when ES6 releases it will have a capital city with some 30 inhabitants, as is the Todd-way at this point.
If all these 30 inhabitants have dialogue or quests, I'll gladly accept that. What's the point of hundreds of NPCs that you can't interact with? They are nothing but waste of CPU time.
@@dasik84 The point is to create an athmosphere of a bigger world. Would GTA5 be the same if you remove all the NPCs you can't interact with? And CPU-time? Seriously? As I said, what I'm hoping for isn't revolutionary. GTA5 is over 10 years old. If 10 year old games gives you CPU problems it might be time to upgrade that potato.
@@jnsl1982 When did I say that I have CPU problems? I said that non-interactive background NPCs are waste of CPU time. Which means the game could use that time for something actually useful. Learn to comprehend written text. They're also waste of code. Of work time of the game developers. And of the players' who give those NPCs attention even though they're just a useless background. If there's an NPC in the game, they should have a personal story or a quest. Otherwise they might as well not be in the game at all. I hated those NPCs in Witcher 3, especially in Novigrad, and I hated them in Starfield. I didn't play GTA 5, but at least in GTA, they are part of the quest "run people over with your car".
@@dasik84 Didn't mean "you" you, more like "one" you. Also calm down, no need for agression. To the point, making a game with decades old CPUs in mind isn't relevant when making one the most anticipated AAA-titles ever. The bar has moved ever upward and BGS struggle to do what other developers do. There are already "useless" NPCs, houses, stuff etc. in BGS-games, just too few. Wanting everyone and everything to be deeply immersive is just unrealistic. Asking for a vibrant, living city that's actually a city and not a village is obtainable and has been so for over a decade. Removing everything "non relevant" leaves a flatland where you run from one cube to the next. Not for me, but you are entitled to your opinion, it's ok to disagree you know. You should try GTA and imagine a city like that in ES6. Even 10% of that would blow my socks off, and I sincerely hope to be proven wrong in my trepidations here. We all want the same thing, no? An awesome game.
@@jnsl1982 You were the one who started with agression and insulted my computer (even though you don't know what CPU I actually have). I only reacted the same way. _To the point, making a game with decades old CPUs in mind isn't relevant_ Again, you didn't comprehend what I said. Even when I literally explained this is NOT about old CPUs. You can have the newest i9 CPU and those NPCs will STILL be loss of that CPU's time. It's not about the CPU's age or power, it's about those NPCs being unnecessary and useless. So please, stop trolling. Or if you're not, try to understand what you're responding to. In GTA, the entire map is one city. It's incomparable.
As someone who has... let's say, "more favorable" opinions of Starfield, something that I don't hear addressed very much about this DLC is its bugged launch, mostly because the fact that it *was* bugged to begin with slipped under the radar for most players. There is a recurring bug that has been patched out a few times already, where any rank of the Leadership perk causes a slew of dialogue triggers to just disappear from the game. The bug was (and as far as I know, still is) active on launch, and the vast majority of companion commentary related to the events of the expansion just never played. I removed the perk with a mod, and everything worked fine the second time around, but come on. Is this what I need to expect? Run a full busted playthrough waiting for my companion to say anything, then find out it was all thanks to a bug? I know a lot of people don't like this game, and that's fine. But the fact that this DLC faceplanted on the first hurdle for its actual fans... I dunno, that's just sad, man.
yeah the lack of anything new in shattered space I think is it's biggest crime, 30$'s is aot, but if there was stuff that lt you enjoy the rest of the game when the quest was over that be cool, but instead it's a one and done quest that you will probably never do again.
Bethesda doesn't make RPG's. They make adventure games with a build your character as you want aspect of the game. They haven't made a Fallout RPG and I'd argue ES has always been an adventure series and not RPG's. Starfield is what you get as Bethesda slowly realize they make adventure games and should take a step back from releasing RPG's on refrigerators. Starfield is just a boring adventure game with a boring Bethesda story that never really matters and an unfun leveling system.
Bethesda remove the ugly piss filter. It looks ugly.the gane is actualy good looking when its off on pc. Also tht quest with the old man would be old bethesda picking a uniqur character and making him somehow a main character so the game is itnresting.instead its now only a side quest
whats worse is that in skyrim you would of gotten a new shout from a dlc like this, but i do believe this didn't even give us new space magic lmao. they arnt even utilizing there big spcae magic thing thats integral to the plot.... wtf is Bethesda doing.... i havnt played this so i dont know if its true, but i didn't see any of it mentioned anywhere... but its hard to make jumping through hoops like its superman 64, seem fun... they really should of done what skyrim did, with a boss fight/dragon fight or a dungeon to unlock the shout. removal of gore, a downgraded modification system that fallout 4 had.... legendary effects are still fun, i like that... but man............ i just hope they dont make the elder scrolls 6, fallout 4, it needs neeeddss neeeeeeeedds skilling, as thats a core element to a elder scrolls game, maybe add back in the stuff they removed from oblivion, and add back magic crafting, they could make that stuff collectables... i didn't mind the new game plus for starfield, but maybe..... if they add this to the elder scrolls don't get rid of what we have in our inventory???? AND MAYBE JUST KEEP OUR HOMESTEAD WHERE IT IS? that would be great. towns and stuff you built that isn't your main house can be reset i guess.
I don't think that loading screens between indoor and outside environments is too bad a criticism, plenty of games do it. I do think they have learnt the lesson of using procedural generation, which probably sounded great during development but the reality was far different once people were playing it...
It makes me sad, it seems extremely likely that this is the last DLC for this game AND more importantly the last "BGS game" from this studio. Editing out all of my personal feelings about this latest game, the modern BGS model has failed miserably twice now, with FO76 and now Starfield, and I can't imagine that Microsoft will greenlight a third. Todd and Emil are both poison as far as marketing is concerned at this point, there's no way they can head up another game launch. (Just stating facts, I'm not especially happy that these things are true.) It's much more likely that we will see semi-frequent games from other publishers and other genres, set in these universes. It's how almost every other video game franchise is managed, not sure why Bethesda thought "one game every 15 years" was a good idea anyway.
Stop being overly dramatic. The game had a $200M budget. In a tweet from the day before release, they show 2M+ Premium Users who had preloaded the game on Steam and Xbox. Do the math. The premium edition is $100 * 2M users = $200M They made their money back before the game was even released, and that's ONLY counting the premium edition of the game.
I love the dlc and starfield. I don't see why the hate is so contagious. Oh wait everyone wants elder scrolls 6 right. I do to but hating on this game wont bring elder scrolls 6 any faster. But there are some valid points in this video and this is a good detailed video. 🎉
I remember when this game came out and reviews pointed to it being decent, there was no performance issues or controversy but after some time the game started being seen negatively and many people started sharing the same feeling. Personally I do not care about starfield or even the elder scrolls but I do feel sad for fallout, it deserves to be treated so much better than it currently is. Bethesda must be thinking they are like rockstar 😂
I felt it was an extreme case of The Emperor's New Clothes. We like this, don't we? We really like this. Oooooohh we like this. If you don't like this, play 100 more hours, then you'll like this.
4:00 WHAT? Look at England! One language but 42 different accents! And it's a damn island! Or look at China. A literal thousand accents in a culture that spand multiple native languages.
Yeah, but it's not believable that a random person would talk Swedish to you on the street when it's not the common language. "HALLÅÅÅÅ :D " said in the voice you use when you greet an old friend is not immersive imo.
Fuck that, the ship was the only thing that had me invested in Starfield. The moment I saw there was no new ship parts u put down the game and haven’t picked it up since
Saying that Starfield or it's DLC "isn't great" is akin to suggesting being given pile of literal sh*t on the plate at a restaurant is "a badly made food". I get that you probably don't want to come out as overly critical from the get-go, but this is just taking the piss. Having a quality standard, especially for the product that cost 110$, isn't something to be shy about. Lowering those expectation and that standard, however, is the *exact reason why we are here at the first place*.
I’ll shorten my comment last, for the sake of Brevity: This DLC feels to many players like a negative response by Bethesda and in particular, Emil Pagliarulo, the master of passive aggressive reactions to even the most constructive criticism. Most of the players who have remained patient with Starfield are receiving Shattered Space as, “We heard your criticisms, and we’re not listening.”
My honest conclusion: When Bethesda discovered their Creation Engine could not handle flying around planets and landing anywhere, let alone from planet to planet, or planet to moon, they refused to back down. They wanted proprietary ownership of the Creation Club, which relies on their engine, for that ongoing long term passive income, based on the work of modders. So, we got loading screen hell instead of the game they were happy to let us believe was coming. They should have either delayed the game while they improved the engine, or delayed it while they learned to use a new engine. Yet, the main plan was nothing to do with artistic merit or even a good game, it was just to create a financial package for Todd Howard and the senior shareholders of Bethesda. This is why Shattered Space is just more of the same thing. They didn’t even start with story or characters, but instead they tried to insert characters into a world they created first, making the game backwards. They simply couldn’t fix any of the main concerns of gamers without going against that set model. Shattered Space is clearly just cut content, revisited and worked over to a standard that Bethesda finds acceptable. But players don’t.
So you would really fly 4 light years from Earth to Jemison? Are you aware it would take you 6 generations, according to the lore? There must be jumps - and therefore loading screens.
@@dasik84 : I am fully aware of the challenges, though not technically cognisant, since I’m not a dev or computer programmer. Other games have handled it with a special effect as the loading screen that makes you feel like you’re engaging a faster than light drive. When you show up in that system, you can then fly from planet to planet; from planet to moon, etc, by using a different drive, your main engines (which still probably breaks the laws of physics), but give you the sensation of flying from (for example) Earth to Mars in a few (roughly 2 or 3) minutes. That’s how Frontier Games did Elite II. The loading takes place in parcels, as you approach a destination. That game uses segmented sections, in the manner that Starfield divides up planetary surfaces, but does it cubically rather than in a lumpy 2.5D compromise. Elite II is a very old game now; well over a decade old I believe. There’s Eve Online, Kerbal Space Program, No Man’s Sky, I could go on, but the point is that other games have been overcoming the loading screen hell difficulties, that Bethesda has so wilfully stuck to, for many years. There is no technical barrier preventing Bethesda from giving us the game THEY conned us into imagining we were getting. And I believe they did that out of greed. Heck! There’s a loading screen just for stepping into your ship! In other games, you can be shot in the cockpit by other other players and are able to fly off, run to the back of your ship and get your buggy out, or just grab weapons and leap out to confront your enemies! Imagine that!? It’s been going on for years! Let me put it to you? What aspect of Starfield or Shattered Space do you think is done well? I mean, is there any one area of gameplay that you think Bethesda nailed? Story telling? Graphics? Narrative? World building? Characters? Anything? Let’s be honest here? Every aspect of this game is subpar, especially for 2024. It’s a Double A game with a Triple A budget. But none of that budget shows up in the final product. If you love it, or just enjoy it, great. May you have many happy hours as the chosen one. Perhaps it’s just that our tastes are irreconcilable?
@@ashroskell I didn't say that Starfield is perfect. It's just you being defensive and imagining things because you know that it's impossible to NOT have loading screens in a space simulator. And that it's stupid to want no loading screens in it and travel in real time from system to system. I don't love Starfield. It's an ok game. Not great, not bad. The worst thing about it is that it delayed the only relevant BGS game in the decade - Elder Scrolls 6. I liked some planets (the ones with life; the one with dream home is gorgeous, for example), researching plants and animals (I took thousands of photos), I liked the main quest a lot, especially the NASA part (I spent two hours just in the museum). I liked the ship building. I really like the parents trait. I like Matteo and Walter. And Sam is cool too. I really like adoring fan, much better than in Oblivion. I don't like the repetitive creatures, the "light chasing" minigame in temples, fact that whenever I go to menu, the game goes to 6 FPS and I must restart it... I don't like that the best NPCs (Matteo, Walter) cannot be companions. I don't like Sarah (too "dry") and Andreja (too insecure). I don't like there are almost no energy weapons in the game so taking that perk was a huge mistake. And I absolutely hate and despise limited inventory. I consider it the biggest bug in the game. And the way how it slows you down (I once spent two real-life days in one landing area trying to move between the POIs because of that). It's inexcusable and the person who put it in the game should be severely punished.
@@dasik84 : You may interpret something I said as defensive, but I promise you, it was not. I never intimated that there should not be loading screens at all, and I think that’s where the misunderstanding arises. “Loading screen hell,” is not solved by zero loading screens. It’s the way they’re handled so poorly (there are countless videos on TH-cam showing you how cleverly devs hide loading screens these days) and put into the game for every single change of scenery; even to the point that you get a loading screen when stepping into the shop and stepping out again. But getting loading screens for getting onboard your own ship is hopelessly incompetent in my view. So you like some aspects of Starfield and that’s fine. But if you and I were to break down some of those things you named, I would probably ruin the game for, which I don’t want to do, by demonstrating that these things are not just bad by comparison to their nearest rivals, but empirically broken by the standards of that universe’s internal logic, the standards of plotting, story telling, character development, technical commitment, care of the final product and even fundamentally (dare I say it?) immoral in places. That is just the base game, however, since I only know shattered space vicariously by watching others’ play throughs on YT, or reading and watching reviews. Yet, I was entirely unsurprised. I am highly critical of Bethesda about this game and even angry at them about it. Perhaps that is what you confused with defensiveness? But I assure you, nothing you say will offend me personally. And I honestly do not wish to rob you of any joy you’re getting from the game. Heck. Someone deserves to get something out of it, so it might as well be you. To that end, you might enjoy the YT channel Crusty And The Moon Wizard? He’s really enjoying the game and he is extremely funny, with a really beautifully witty script. I’ve been getting my fun out of Starfield by watching him play it and he has something to say to the nay sayers and, “outrage farmers,” about it too. I don’t want to be one of those either. I just have some strong feelings on the issue, since I’ve been watching Bethesda slide down a morally spiralled slope for some years now. I honestly don’t believe they deserve the success they’ve had with this game, but my wife assures me I’m a grumpy, miserable old man and she’s,usually right about these things.
@@ashroskell Again, I didn't say I loved Starfield. And yes, I know that there are better games, or as you called them "nearest rivals". I also don't and have never care(d) about "standards" of plotting, story telling and character development, because in reality, there are none. Yes, universities teach students certain rules of creative writing, but that doesn't mean those rules are objective truth. If anyone followed those rules, literature would be really boring and repetitive. And again, I'm not saying the Starfield writing is excellent, it's not. The Paradiso quest, for example, is an insult. Insult to the players AND to the game itself. It had so much potential and they just gave up on it... So I partly agree with you, I just don't hate the game. It's fun. It's just not great. And it's not TES6, so it's a huge minus. I'm actually genuinely interested in you opinion on how the things I said I liked defy the universe's internal logic. Thanks for the suggestion of the YT channel, btw, I'll check it out. I love how he gave the evil haters the "outrage farmers" nickname. :) Also, I haven't bought Shattered Space either, I'm not insane. First, the price is a robbery on a bright day, second, when MrMattyPlays, the biggest lover of Starfield, says he's disappointed, it's better no buying it, especially when it's for more than $10.
Twenty star systems with more stuff on the planets and moons would've been much more sensible than the thousands of empty worlds they created. Such a strange decision 🤔
📌🎯💯
U should work at Bethesda, it’s obvious they made « systems » and « planets/worlds » on the daily basis but didn’t bothered include « stuff » to their galactic empty game
and only like 30 poi's lol
I think it was the 'cheap' decision. Automated content costs less money and requires far less resources. BGS is stuck in a 1990's/2000's mentality where stuff like that was accepted or they just don't want to spend the money on it.
Imagine the difference it could've made to have a fog of war over the star map. Legitimately allow a player to "explore". Such a cheap and easy addition. It wouldn't fix everything but it would at least allow for genuine space exploration. Hide everything you haven't travelled to. Limit fast travel until you visit at least 1 planet in a new system.
the problem really is the 1k worlds feel like nothing other than 1k small rooms with loading screens between them that randomly generate roughly same room but with a new colour pallet over and over again
Literally just 3 planets (one per faction) would have been completely fine.
And even when you are on a far off, dead moon. The moment you exit your ship, there's tons of facilities all over the surface, spaced apart every 500m.
I don't even think you can find a completely empty moon
In a time where Blood & Wine, Phantom Liberty and Shadow of the Erdtree exist and have set the bar for what DLC for AAA games can be Shattered Space is an embarrassment.
Don't put B&W in the same sentence as any Cyberpunk trash.
@@peew1020 Phantom Liberty was amazing and the 2.0 update transformed Cyberpunk into one the most flexible and fun FPS games ever in my opinion.
@@amysteriousviewer3772My only issue with cyberpunk is enemy variety. I just can’t bring myself to wanna play that game again.
@@peew1020I played Cyberpunk (and Phantom Liberty) a couple of months ago. It was quite an enjoyable experience.
All of their previous DLC is LEAGUES above Shattered Space (I’m a massive sucker for Dragonborn specifically)
If the game had been more seamless and had maybe 6-8 handcrafted worlds loaded with content, this would have gone over better.
I totally agree....and there are only THREE major cities in the game??????what the freak??????
I don't care what BGS dev tells me. Starfield doesn't represent why I play their game. Outer Worlds does a better job than this.
That's exactly why I wrote off Starfield, it had no spark of actual creativity just bland sci-fi
Unfortunately, they're still too small after leaving Hodd's Creation Club and unless they persevere like Running with Scissors with this new IP, it may not work well when the "latest" work is The Outer Worlds with fancier graphics and the same price tag.
They both suck. The writing is super cringe in OW and you can’t even fly your ship. Good try tho
@@CulturedNeon-u4w And there's less than 1% of the "original" 13 MILLION schmucks playing Shitfield, boyo. Try harder with Hodd's premium horse armor.
Starfield wasn’t created for Bestheda fans, it was created for people that wanted a modern realistic (grounded) space sim.
What really disappointed me was the shallowness of the story and the lack of integration with the base game. It doesn't matter whether you picked the good or bad ending of the DLC. There are no consequences. No mention of anything if you picked the bad ending, apart from the Lodge members being angry with you. Good ending? Might as well have never happened. And don't get me started on lore. In Skyrim, you still have TH-camrs making videos about Skyrim lore and "things you might not know". Starfield? EpicNate did ONE video before the game launched but didn't do any other videos, because Bethesda decided to take the lazy way out and use fragments of Dickens books. The lore is even shallower than the dialogue from those moo people in New Atlantis who don't even have a dialogue tree.
I just hope they put more effort into ES6...
Lmfao l😂 u still have Hope?! There is NO HOPE!
Abandon all hope ye who enter here
Get ready for 80% argonian NPC bandit dudes identifying as beautiful sultry bretons
Whatever you do, don't pre-order it, don't even buy it. Wait for reviews.
Don't let the first trailers get you
It's not a lack of effort, it's dog💩directing from Emil
Fizhy the goat
The only livestock to run a TH-cam channel.
@realncrranger Underrated comment
Honestly, the first time I've heard this referred to as cut content. 100% agree.
Appreciate your honesty. It wasn't great, but it certainly felt undercooked.
As the head of a tiny studio, I like watching these types of videos while we’re working on our next project.
awesome! I hope your game turns out good and sells well 😊
😂
What you working on
@@becauseforeverended8861 It’s a dungeon crawler that mixes the combat of Doom and Halo.
@@Incog-e1z sounds interesting just out of curiosity checkpoints or rouge like
starfeild having less shit in it then No mans Sky is IMPRESSIVE
Current day No Man Sky have more content than 3 Starfields combined. They actually put effort there, contrary to Bethesda
I'm sure their new game no mans fire or whatever already has twice as much compelling content as Starfield
no mans sky is actually a good game though
Starfield has more active players than NMS 😂 good try tho they both suck. And ALWAYS HAVE
@@CulturedNeon-u4w You can think that, but I have a lot of fun playing NMS 🤷🏻♂️
Ill be almost 40 when fallout 5 comes out ....
And so true, Starfield always felt like it was biting off more than it could chew. And i dont think any DLC could address that. Unless they went full Cyberpunk and dropped something like Phantom Liberty but they keep doubling down on their outdated game design and so it ends up being a hollow game. A fun concept but poorly executed because they wanted to have so much of it instead of just condensing it into a much smaller game with a small bunch of unique planets and unique variety in the gameplay which would have been a lot more value than targeting a big scope of procedurally generated nothingness.
Cyberpunk was no better it was covered in bugs more starfield was!
@swellerace Yeah obviously and that's why I was referring to Phantom Liberty DLC because that's what saved Cyberpunk
@@TheOnlyTaps it didn't
@@swellerace Phantom Liberty won DLC of the year last year and skyrocketed Cyberpunk sales alongside when Edgerunners launched so you can keep telling yourself otherwise but the facts speak for themselves. Cyberpunk was dead in the water after their abysmal 2020 launch but in 2023 they listened and made the necessary changes and boom they were able to leave that project with their heads held high. Bethesda keeps refusing to listen to what their customer base wants and so Starfield missed the opportunity to have their DLC make the kind of dent that Phantom Liberty made.
@@TheOnlyTaps meaning what It didn't make the charts like gta 5 or fornite and didn't you hear that cd projekt red went woke with dei so i wouldn't be supporting them for too much longer or bethesda!
Starfield “isn’t great”.
Imagine giving Bethesda another chance after Fallout 76
While I agree there are issues, but as a space exploration game I have really enjoyed it and have 2000 hrs and have played shattered space 3 times.. To see how different decisions played out. I enjoy building ships and outposts, and ship battles. The mods that are coming out, as always address some of the deficits that I found. What I wished was better is the character development over all and fleshing out andrejas history in dazra in the DLC . Feels like a big miss in a DLC focused on the varuun. Also wished that the choices you made ie starting the serpents crusade had an impact on the settled systems as you play. I do think the new companions were a good addition, especially sahima.. Really brings varuun culture to your crew and she is interesting. At the end of the day I find starfield to be an open with loads of possibility, and really hope Bethesda and the modding community capitolize on this more!
In No Man's Sky, your ship is an actual vehicle by which you explore the game with, fly around planets and pick and choose your landing spots.
In Starfield, your ship is a glorified loading screen loader that allows you to appear in the orbit of planets and decide where to land from there. It's not a vehicle, but a box by which you load another skybox. You can't do anything with your space ship other than fight other ships and sink credits to make it better at fighting other ships. You can't trade goods because of how merchants work, you don't need to make it fast to deliver messages to places and there are no quests that involve your ship because the developers didn't want players creativity getting in the way of quest design.
Starfield is just Fallout 4 with slightly better graphics set in space.
Morrowinds cities felt like they were a good size for a volcanic island.
I am once again posting "obscenities" until you talk about Mafia.
Let's face it, Stanfield was just boring. I forgot the DLC was a thing despite briefly covering it during the Xbox showcase earlier this year
No it was full of bugs and a disaster!!!!
my son and i were talking and he as a 15 year old described starfield as "plays like a overly ambitous fallout 4 mod"
Your son never was there when Starflight (1986) came out and again on the Sega Mega Drive in 1991.
@@UmmerFarooq-wx4yo hey buddy you just roll in from stupid town?
Short of a bunch of huge reworks, yeah, I never saw Starfield getting good additions.
Starfield had a lot of problens actually.
Bland Worlddesign,
Abysmal Lore, underused 3D Combat, Booooooooring writing, Plotholes, clear Lack of internal vision and communication and just genuine unambitiousness and lack of care.
Shattered Space adressed ONE of these problems. MAYBE. The world. The other ones are still very much there, and they didn't even make an interesting world.
Shattered Space is when Emil Pagliarulo thinks he's Michael Kirkbride...
In Skyrim towns' defense, they are based on medieval towns, a lot of which were no bigger than 2x3 blocks, so you can suspend your disbelief much easier than vs a "Utopian" megacity that's only 2 blocks long.
Especially when other games have accustomed us to traverse large modern and futuristic cities. Small towns are very frequent in medieval RPGs, so it's easier to accept it.
I gave you like for your comment on weapons. You're the first TH-camr who isn't pathologically obsessed with guns in the game and all you care about is whether your gun is effective in killing enemies. That makes you an actual RPG player, not a pseudo RPG player who thinks Starfield is CoD clone.
It's the writing and the engine. Both of which are kind of important (sarcasm).
The writing is dime store novel junk. Cardboard cutout characters. Uninteresting fetch quests. There is nothing about the tech that prevented Bethesda from writing good stories. They just chose to write bland, milquetoast stuff. Maybe they really think the writing is good? That would be scary.
The engine is what brings down the gameplay loop. Loading screen after loading screen. A ship that you really don't actually pilot. Not even joystick support. The same 30 POIs cut and pasted across the galaxy. That is not procedural generation. That is 30 odd things, hand crafted, and then cut and pasted everywhere. The planets are the same. The same flora and fauna cut and pasted everywhere.
For all of that, I got my money's worth out of the core game. UC and CF quest lines were fun. After the March release, combined with mods, combat started to get fun. I like ship building, even if I can't do much with the ship that I have built. I got $70 worth of entertainment out of the game. But I do not feel like I want more of the same. What I got really wasn't good enough to make me want to come back.
Massively rewrite or port to a new engine. Make space flight a thing. Remove POIs entirely for all I care. Rewriting existing story lines probably won't happen, but it should. At a minimum, raise the quality of new story lines. Then I'll come back. For now, NFW I am paying $30 for more bad writing.
even Mass Effect andromeda have less boring exploration than starfield
Everything Starfield has(except for ship customisation) Warframe has exactly that.
By Bethesda logic Warframe is an open world space exploration RPG.
Infact I like Warframe's ship fights better
Half-assed Bethesda released a half-assed DLC with your standard half-assed Emil writing.
7:30 you nailed my biggest issue with Starfield, Bethesda and their engine. Since Morowind, all they "cities" were villages...but you can run trough the whole province of Skyrim in ten minutes (tried that). But when everything is small, it doesnt stick out so much. But when you have whole 1:1 sized planets, which are empty.
What I really fail to understand, why they did not work around this. Why not make Jemison restricted? You can just land in spaceport the Constellation has license for using. Then slap some love poly skyscrappers in the background, put big city lights on the planet texture during night and just like that, it feels believable. Whyt there are not more rigs visible on bacground on Volii (Neon)? By letting you explore Jemison and other planets, and finding there is nothing there, they willingly break their own illusion...
Why are there not more riggs on Volii? Because the umbrella tech to harness the constant lightning is made by one failing corporation who just sits on the patent.
The lore isn't as empty as you all like to complain about.
@@badman564 And why does the city need to by powered exclusively by lightning? This is the universe with compact and safe fusion power. But even if there was a solid lore reason, its once again lore hurting the immersion, not the other way around. Right now, there is this so called "pleasure city", which is notorious tourist destination, yet is so small it has literaly two landing pads, one permanently occupied by your ship. And if your game/engine/devs cant handle bigger cities, would not it be better to handwave it by lore, the there are other rigs around?
@@lihkan there's a solid lore reason, you just chose to ignore it.
The tech is needed because the amount and power of strikes. The company that made it didn't have the resources to make another, but they refuse to share the patent because it's the only invention they have. This is all explained in-universe, with spoken dialogue, and environmental storytelling (not just logs).
This is common amongst this community. You complain about "muh no lore" while ignoring the lore.
@@badman564 I am aware of this, but you miss my point. What I am trying to say is that Bethesda lore in Starfield clashes with the level design, and it should be other way around. Especially if you have completely new franchise. If you cant create convincingly sized city, why write a lore that says there are no other rigs on the planet, when existence of the other rigs would be the simplest way how to reconcile the size of Neon with the its role in the world?
@@lihkan No I saw your point, I don't agree.
I don't think it's "solution" to change the lore of a planet to fix an imagined "scale" problem (a nitpick on a tech limitation), while labeling it a design issue and ignoring both gameplay and lore reasons for the original decision.
Apparently in a universe with rampant piracy and danger, they would want to build more drug factories, lowering the price of a drug that they also have exclusive rights for and currently control the market. Like it's all owned by megacorps, who engage in horrible trade practices, they talk about creating fake scarcity for higher profits in the game. Lol
Also, let's be real, what were y'all expecting with the cities, cus I got exactly what I thought. Remember Diamond City and it's 20 residents? You have to see the writing on the walls, it's never gonna be a live city. It's always gonna be a facsimile of one.
I've frankly been enjoying getting back into it. You start to catch small things people say that add to the universe in really unique ways. Example, Listen for how many people talk about how "space is too dangerous", and it becomes clear that most people rarely go to space. And when you take into account the lack of FTL communications, it solidifies the general isolation between the various planets.
I think there's a lot more under the surface, making for a really unique setting and universe. But almost all of the "improvements" I hear from YTs and comments would largely make it more like other sci-fi.
And mind you, I'm not just simping. I think there were missteps which hurt the tone, and it's clear to me that there was behind the scenes meddling going on, which imo made the game more generic.
Look at the Lack of Gore, which ruins the tone in many areas. Terrormorphs were hurt by this tremendously, and are more generic as a result.
You've raised a good question regarding the solitary small towns on empty planets. Why would people have to travel to another world far away, when there's so much space on each planet? is that hand waved away in the game or what?
Ohhh Starfield! Such potential... how you promised us we would "reach the stairs," but failed to deliver. Honestly the zero G combat is all I do in starfield.
Elderscrolls & Fallout have smaller cities/towns and it makes sense, In the nuclear war would cause settlements to have less people and be smaller, the same with less techanogically advanced times like those of obiviion and skyrim..
I still think starfield should've been our solar system as a centre and surrounded by honeycomb shaped solar systems for the main game and expanding it for dlc, it would've made more sense for how long the game took over the years spent on an empty universe
Great watch as always 🫡
It’s so crazy that BGS was once my favorite game studio. I loved Skyrim and Fallout 4.
But then Fallout 76, A subscription service for it, and then Starfield. Sigh.
Perfectly described, Starfield is very boring. They could have done more for the base game and the dlc, but like you said, it looks more like cut content. Great video btw, i like a lot your videos, keep up the good work. 👌
No it was very bugged!
You mention magenta - one game I really like (because it is FUN, though it is not critically acclaimed) is The Outer Worlds. The big problem with it is the magenta! Magenta everywhere - it is quite sickly to look at.
I’m an obsidian super fan and made it through about 30 minutes of the Outer Worlds due to how insanely ugly it was. It didn’t help that the worldbuilding was purely absurd and satirical and didn’t try to earnestly do anything interesting that I could see.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces
Well, I respect your point of view, obviously.
And I am not going to argue about its ugly visuals. It's not just the magenta everywhere, but the armour is hideous! You can't wear anything that looks nice with any protection till late in the game.
I don't mind the character models - I think they are fine, except that they do tend to be a bit 'samey'.
And yet once I bought it, I played it through and immediately started new playthrough. I never do that!
I just found the action/discovery balance was good, the dialogue funny (not deep - just funny). It's all pretty broad. But sometimes that's just what I want.
I should confess that I'm an older gamer. Decades older than the average! Don't want to make a big deal of it, but it is relevant. Because I'm not looking for a challenge. I'm not interested in 'gitting gud'! I don't have any peers to impress or discuss tactics with - my friends are not gamers, to say the least.
So I suppose I just like it because it is simple escapist fun. I really enjoyed Fallout London (finished it two days ago - just under 200hrs.), but it took a lot of work to get it running, and at low levels it can be quite punishing. And the quests (when they are working) can be pretty convoluted. Outer Worlds is nothing like that - it's just simple fun.
I like it, but if they make a new one (there is talk), I hope they bring in a better visual designer, amongst other things.
@@ZachariahJ
Interesting perspective and I see your point. I’ll keep it in mind in case I consider another playthrough.
To slightly restate my point, I think the tone is what really bothered me. New Vegas felt like it struck a nice balance between the zany satire in Fallout and some very serious tones. The Outer Worlds felt like pure satire, which I find harder to get immersed in if that makes sense.
@@ModuliOfRiemannSurfaces
I did set the bar pretty low for Outer Worlds! I've stopped playing many games because something bugged me - Dead Space 3, even Red Dead 2! (Arthur was fine, but his gang were idiots, and I kept away from them - but I had to join them to do missions, which I didn't enjoy).
The Outer Worlds does wear its heart on its sleeve. I'm OK with that. (In fact the forced attempts at 'balance' tend to jar a bit, for me, tbh.)
Best to think of it as a B-movie, rather than a quality video game!
I got it in a Steam sale, and I think that is appropriate. ;-)
I've not seen a single positive comment or video about the DLC and honestly that says everything.
Ign which are sony pony lovers gave both star field and shattered space a 7/10. They were amongst the only ones to give starfield a low score like that. Seeing as how the 100 million active sony playstation users ponied up and review bombed starfield constantly from before its released (but were laughed at and exposed for not playing the game) and continued until they had held the gaming community hostage suffering Stockholm syndrome appeasement and then indignation against starfield, that indignation made the gaming community demand that starfield was suddenly going to launch a cyberpunk sized city all over a giant planet with minute potato physics. Mind you, the "dlc" was already paid for by those who paid full price for the game. Poverty folks got a cheaper option.
@@UmmerFarooq-wx4yo Can someone who speaks English translate from fanboy?
@@UmmerFarooq-wx4yocrying is all you do.
Im sorry....the dlc isn't worth finishing the video...
💀!!!
The funny part to me is that in so many ways I feel like Mass Effect (especially 2) did the world building better.
Sure the levels were fairly small, but they felt lived in. You could look out beyond the boundaries of the playable area and imagine the lives of people living in the universe even if you couldn't go there
If Starfield was a song:
“Painfully Mid”
Where is the technical accomplishment you talk about?
BGS are inferior at both technical and creative endeavors right now compared to competitors.
I still miss Sutch, Karthwasten and Granite Hill.
Vote with your wallets!! Don't buy anything from Bethesda until the reviews come out... it's time these game studios start respecting their customer!
Bethesda games are their own genre at this point. If you didn't want a Bethesda game in space, then why did you buy it?? lmao
Anyways, can't wait to preorder the next TES game.
9:10 Moons are planets too. Just like melon is a fruit and spider is an incest.
Those who correct people on this are annoying.
The game is passable, until with get another Space Game from another game Developer which offers the same as StarField and more.
But until that day arrives, StarField is the only Space Game on Console which offers Ship , Base building, Third Person Create You Own Character, with a Story and lots of side quests and lots of places to explore (Even Though they are Generated)
So until we get another Space Game on The Consoles, this is an original take, which Bethesda alone attempted to create.
Uhhhh hello? No Mans Sky?
@@jacobmcklowski4428 no, starfield.
@@jacobmcklowski4428 Hello? Story and quests?
@@UmmerFarooq-wx4yo stop crying
This game feels to me like it suffers from poor adaption of concept to actual game. Like they wanted a cool space game during the pioneering times of humanities space exploration, but they didnt realize to adapt that idea to a game format you NEED to have more density and pois than there would ever be in a realistic scenario. Its not a movie where the image of a barren landscape is emotional and atmospheric. The player is sitting there looking at it and now like ok what am i doing.
If they made a LOTR game open world and realistically sized it would be miserable to experience, theres nothing but ruins forest fields and mountings in most the land. But in a movie format they make it interesting with scenery shots roll images and music and montages of the main character’s progression.
Id love a 1:1 LOTR game, but then again, I can look at a landscape and actually feel something.
@@badman564 I mean at least there would be more than 100m tall hills. Im sure most people can feel something from looking at a landscape. But again poor adaptation to its format. Theres very little uniqueness to the landscape from planet to planet. Because the terrain generator just doesnt have that much to work with. Desolate planets also have monumental formations like olympus monz or canyons the size of countries. But non of thats in starfield, just endless generated dunes and hills with some rocks and variously generated shaders. You can actually look at the landscape of fallout or elder scrolls and feel something. And astronaut can look at a dune and feel something cause they’re there. But a camera of a dune is limited in enjoyment. Its like they half understand that you need to populate the world with something because they have 1000s of ships landing at random spots aimlessly and taking off all over the planet if you take the density you see to the scale of the whole planet. But then they have a fraction of the buildings or pois needed for that kind of traffic. It somehow feels like playing the first hour of fallout 4 over and over and over again without getting any further into the story where you see the same locations and events 100 times within 2 hours of play, but theyre all 5 times farther apart than they need to be.
would've made more sense to delve deep into house Valruun history and culture more.
They can't because there is no lore.
Bethesda needs new management, Starfield does still for me have the magic of what Bethesda can still offer but the whole procedural design for the planets was a dumb idea. Wish they could have done instead what Mass Effect / Destiny did, just a hand full of plantes instead of their dumb 120 destination with hundreds of planets with nothing to do . Respect Todd Howard but his vision for what Bethesda games should be has hit a road block since Skyrim, went from morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3 to Skyrim…then look how they have fallen, fo4 (its ok but a major disappointment after Skyrim, fallout 76 to now starfield. Before the DLC I had starfiled at a low 80s, after the DLC i have to settle it a mid 70s. The dlc for me made the game worse with its technical issues, so much stuttering after i installed the DLC. I’m around 110 hrs n need one mission left to wrap up Starfield and the few times i enjoyed it , it was a blast but so many bad design choices and the constant load screen makes Starfield one of those gaming disappointment . Was hoping Shatter space would be like the cyberpunk DLC, fix issues and do things better than before but went backwards. Hope they learn their lesson but we are 3 games in a row were they keep doing backwards instead of forward.
Idk maybe I wasn't playing starfeild right. I couldn't really get into it. Maybe it's me. That being said I've enjoyed your take on the game. I'll g8ve it another go one day tho
Same. I have started maybe 3 or 4 playthroughs on both my Xbox and PC over the course of a year and I haven't been able to complete at least one playthrough before I lose interest and play something else. I have over 1000 hours in pretty much every Fallout game bar 1, 2 and 76 and have probably triple that in each Elder Scrolls game since Morrowind. Just extremely disappointing. Bethesda used to be great, but those things it was great at have been innovated and implemented better in other games by other studios since. Now Bethesda is just a stark definition of shallow mediocrity.
The idea is great. The actual game is terrible 😂
The underwhelming aspect of Bethesda games is something that worries me. When after having saved the world in Oblivion I strongly remember the underwhelming feeling when realizing there where like 3 other dudes there cheering me on. At the time this was brushed off since the technical obstacles were apparent, but all these years later they are still kind of there. GTA5 has been out for a long time now. We've all seen whats possible, the cat's out of the bag. I fear however that Bethesda are woefully left behind in this matter, and I'm fairly certain that when ES6 releases it will have a capital city with some 30 inhabitants, as is the Todd-way at this point.
If all these 30 inhabitants have dialogue or quests, I'll gladly accept that. What's the point of hundreds of NPCs that you can't interact with? They are nothing but waste of CPU time.
@@dasik84 The point is to create an athmosphere of a bigger world. Would GTA5 be the same if you remove all the NPCs you can't interact with? And CPU-time? Seriously? As I said, what I'm hoping for isn't revolutionary. GTA5 is over 10 years old. If 10 year old games gives you CPU problems it might be time to upgrade that potato.
@@jnsl1982 When did I say that I have CPU problems? I said that non-interactive background NPCs are waste of CPU time. Which means the game could use that time for something actually useful. Learn to comprehend written text.
They're also waste of code. Of work time of the game developers. And of the players' who give those NPCs attention even though they're just a useless background.
If there's an NPC in the game, they should have a personal story or a quest. Otherwise they might as well not be in the game at all.
I hated those NPCs in Witcher 3, especially in Novigrad, and I hated them in Starfield. I didn't play GTA 5, but at least in GTA, they are part of the quest "run people over with your car".
@@dasik84 Didn't mean "you" you, more like "one" you. Also calm down, no need for agression. To the point, making a game with decades old CPUs in mind isn't relevant when making one the most anticipated AAA-titles ever. The bar has moved ever upward and BGS struggle to do what other developers do.
There are already "useless" NPCs, houses, stuff etc. in BGS-games, just too few. Wanting everyone and everything to be deeply immersive is just unrealistic. Asking for a vibrant, living city that's actually a city and not a village is obtainable and has been so for over a decade.
Removing everything "non relevant" leaves a flatland where you run from one cube to the next. Not for me, but you are entitled to your opinion, it's ok to disagree you know.
You should try GTA and imagine a city like that in ES6. Even 10% of that would blow my socks off, and I sincerely hope to be proven wrong in my trepidations here. We all want the same thing, no? An awesome game.
@@jnsl1982 You were the one who started with agression and insulted my computer (even though you don't know what CPU I actually have). I only reacted the same way.
_To the point, making a game with decades old CPUs in mind isn't relevant_
Again, you didn't comprehend what I said. Even when I literally explained this is NOT about old CPUs. You can have the newest i9 CPU and those NPCs will STILL be loss of that CPU's time. It's not about the CPU's age or power, it's about those NPCs being unnecessary and useless.
So please, stop trolling. Or if you're not, try to understand what you're responding to.
In GTA, the entire map is one city. It's incomparable.
Nice work mate !
4:47 no way Bethesda just rehashed space Alduin and called it a day. So fucking lazy
If only every Starfield main city can be as big and lively as Baldur's Gate.
You’re right, it’s perfect!!!
lol.
It’s just boring. No getting around it.
Bethesda isn't great either
And don't think the elder scrolls 6 or a fallout 5 will save bethesda or impress you!!!
Starfield is a game a mile wide and a whole inch deep
love your dog _!!_
As someone who has... let's say, "more favorable" opinions of Starfield, something that I don't hear addressed very much about this DLC is its bugged launch, mostly because the fact that it *was* bugged to begin with slipped under the radar for most players.
There is a recurring bug that has been patched out a few times already, where any rank of the Leadership perk causes a slew of dialogue triggers to just disappear from the game. The bug was (and as far as I know, still is) active on launch, and the vast majority of companion commentary related to the events of the expansion just never played. I removed the perk with a mod, and everything worked fine the second time around, but come on. Is this what I need to expect? Run a full busted playthrough waiting for my companion to say anything, then find out it was all thanks to a bug?
I know a lot of people don't like this game, and that's fine. But the fact that this DLC faceplanted on the first hurdle for its actual fans... I dunno, that's just sad, man.
Starfield has me valuing the world of Half-Life and all its mods and variants so much more. SF... meh
Starfield isnt great in general Im glad I tried it out when I had game pass and dipped out early and never went back. The game is boring and broken
yeah the lack of anything new in shattered space I think is it's biggest crime, 30$'s is aot, but if there was stuff that lt you enjoy the rest of the game when the quest was over that be cool, but instead it's a one and done quest that you will probably never do again.
Please read a book and learn basic English.
Fuchsia or magenta one has more red one has more blue or you can say one has more pink and one has more purple I lean towards'80s color palette
Bethesda doesn't make RPG's. They make adventure games with a build your character as you want aspect of the game. They haven't made a Fallout RPG and I'd argue ES has always been an adventure series and not RPG's.
Starfield is what you get as Bethesda slowly realize they make adventure games and should take a step back from releasing RPG's on refrigerators. Starfield is just a boring adventure game with a boring Bethesda story that never really matters and an unfun leveling system.
"build your character as you want " But no matter what you choose, the game makes you a miner :/
@@MMMNemesisyou got a problem with hard work and digging?
_build your character as you want_
So in other words, RPG.
Never pluralize with an apostrophe. The plural of RPG is RPGs.
Bethesda remove the ugly piss filter. It looks ugly.the gane is actualy good looking when its off on pc. Also tht quest with the old man would be old bethesda picking a uniqur character and making him somehow a main character so the game is itnresting.instead its now only a side quest
DEIfield
„Field“ 💀
PUPPY! Please pet the puppy for me and tell them they’re a good doggo, and we enjoy bonus doggo barks!
whats worse is that in skyrim you would of gotten a new shout from a dlc like this, but i do believe this didn't even give us new space magic lmao. they arnt even utilizing there big spcae magic thing thats integral to the plot.... wtf is Bethesda doing.... i havnt played this so i dont know if its true, but i didn't see any of it mentioned anywhere... but its hard to make jumping through hoops like its superman 64, seem fun... they really should of done what skyrim did, with a boss fight/dragon fight or a dungeon to unlock the shout.
removal of gore, a downgraded modification system that fallout 4 had.... legendary effects are still fun, i like that...
but man............ i just hope they dont make the elder scrolls 6, fallout 4, it needs neeeddss neeeeeeeedds skilling, as thats a core element to a elder scrolls game, maybe add back in the stuff they removed from oblivion, and add back magic crafting, they could make that stuff collectables... i didn't mind the new game plus for starfield, but maybe..... if they add this to the elder scrolls don't get rid of what we have in our inventory???? AND MAYBE JUST KEEP OUR HOMESTEAD WHERE IT IS? that would be great. towns and stuff you built that isn't your main house can be reset i guess.
Would have or would've. Never "would of."
I don't think that loading screens between indoor and outside environments is too bad a criticism, plenty of games do it.
I do think they have learnt the lesson of using procedural generation, which probably sounded great during development but the reality was far different once people were playing it...
It makes me sad, it seems extremely likely that this is the last DLC for this game AND more importantly the last "BGS game" from this studio. Editing out all of my personal feelings about this latest game, the modern BGS model has failed miserably twice now, with FO76 and now Starfield, and I can't imagine that Microsoft will greenlight a third. Todd and Emil are both poison as far as marketing is concerned at this point, there's no way they can head up another game launch. (Just stating facts, I'm not especially happy that these things are true.)
It's much more likely that we will see semi-frequent games from other publishers and other genres, set in these universes. It's how almost every other video game franchise is managed, not sure why Bethesda thought "one game every 15 years" was a good idea anyway.
Stop being overly dramatic. The game had a $200M budget. In a tweet from the day before release, they show 2M+ Premium Users who had preloaded the game on Steam and Xbox. Do the math. The premium edition is $100 * 2M users = $200M
They made their money back before the game was even released, and that's ONLY counting the premium edition of the game.
If they would just update their engine. Unreal would fix 60% of their problems.
I love the dlc and starfield. I don't see why the hate is so contagious. Oh wait everyone wants elder scrolls 6 right. I do to but hating on this game wont bring elder scrolls 6 any faster. But there are some valid points in this video and this is a good detailed video. 🎉
It's because it's a bad game and the studio is being an ignorant ass about it.
I remember when this game came out and reviews pointed to it being decent, there was no performance issues or controversy but after some time the game started being seen negatively and many people started sharing the same feeling. Personally I do not care about starfield or even the elder scrolls but I do feel sad for fallout, it deserves to be treated so much better than it currently is. Bethesda must be thinking they are like rockstar 😂
I felt it was an extreme case of The Emperor's New Clothes. We like this, don't we? We really like this. Oooooohh we like this. If you don't like this, play 100 more hours, then you'll like this.
4:00 WHAT? Look at England! One language but 42 different accents! And it's a damn island! Or look at China. A literal thousand accents in a culture that spand multiple native languages.
Yeah, but it's not believable that a random person would talk Swedish to you on the street when it's not the common language. "HALLÅÅÅÅ :D " said in the voice you use when you greet an old friend is not immersive imo.
@@MMMNemesis yes, it is, welcome to 2024.
IN MY OPINION! I think that Starfield has improved from launch and I do enjoy it, but it still isn’t perfect
Fuck that, the ship was the only thing that had me invested in Starfield. The moment I saw there was no new ship parts u put down the game and haven’t picked it up since
Saying that Starfield or it's DLC "isn't great" is akin to suggesting being given pile of literal sh*t on the plate at a restaurant is "a badly made food".
I get that you probably don't want to come out as overly critical from the get-go, but this is just taking the piss.
Having a quality standard, especially for the product that cost 110$, isn't something to be shy about. Lowering those expectation and that standard, however, is the *exact reason why we are here at the first place*.
To think, in an ideal world we could have had TES:6 and Fallout 5 by now.
Who else rewound for the dog?
I’ll shorten my comment last, for the sake of Brevity: This DLC feels to many players like a negative response by Bethesda and in particular, Emil Pagliarulo, the master of passive aggressive reactions to even the most constructive criticism. Most of the players who have remained patient with Starfield are receiving Shattered Space as, “We heard your criticisms, and we’re not listening.”
Oddysey was a good game bruh
they better release this on playstation soon, what a letdown of a game
Why would you want it on playstation
if it's a letdown of a game why would you want to get it on playstation lol
У тебя прикольная псинка.
Starfield is pretty much just an engine test run for TES6. I’m glad they gave themselves a practice run and messed this one up instead
My honest conclusion: When Bethesda discovered their Creation Engine could not handle flying around planets and landing anywhere, let alone from planet to planet, or planet to moon, they refused to back down. They wanted proprietary ownership of the Creation Club, which relies on their engine, for that ongoing long term passive income, based on the work of modders. So, we got loading screen hell instead of the game they were happy to let us believe was coming.
They should have either delayed the game while they improved the engine, or delayed it while they learned to use a new engine. Yet, the main plan was nothing to do with artistic merit or even a good game, it was just to create a financial package for Todd Howard and the senior shareholders of Bethesda.
This is why Shattered Space is just more of the same thing. They didn’t even start with story or characters, but instead they tried to insert characters into a world they created first, making the game backwards. They simply couldn’t fix any of the main concerns of gamers without going against that set model.
Shattered Space is clearly just cut content, revisited and worked over to a standard that Bethesda finds acceptable. But players don’t.
So you would really fly 4 light years from Earth to Jemison? Are you aware it would take you 6 generations, according to the lore? There must be jumps - and therefore loading screens.
@@dasik84 : I am fully aware of the challenges, though not technically cognisant, since I’m not a dev or computer programmer. Other games have handled it with a special effect as the loading screen that makes you feel like you’re engaging a faster than light drive. When you show up in that system, you can then fly from planet to planet; from planet to moon, etc, by using a different drive, your main engines (which still probably breaks the laws of physics), but give you the sensation of flying from (for example) Earth to Mars in a few (roughly 2 or 3) minutes. That’s how Frontier Games did Elite II. The loading takes place in parcels, as you approach a destination. That game uses segmented sections, in the manner that Starfield divides up planetary surfaces, but does it cubically rather than in a lumpy 2.5D compromise. Elite II is a very old game now; well over a decade old I believe.
There’s Eve Online, Kerbal Space Program, No Man’s Sky, I could go on, but the point is that other games have been overcoming the loading screen hell difficulties, that Bethesda has so wilfully stuck to, for many years. There is no technical barrier preventing Bethesda from giving us the game THEY conned us into imagining we were getting. And I believe they did that out of greed.
Heck! There’s a loading screen just for stepping into your ship! In other games, you can be shot in the cockpit by other other players and are able to fly off, run to the back of your ship and get your buggy out, or just grab weapons and leap out to confront your enemies! Imagine that!? It’s been going on for years!
Let me put it to you? What aspect of Starfield or Shattered Space do you think is done well? I mean, is there any one area of gameplay that you think Bethesda nailed? Story telling? Graphics? Narrative? World building? Characters? Anything?
Let’s be honest here? Every aspect of this game is subpar, especially for 2024. It’s a Double A game with a Triple A budget. But none of that budget shows up in the final product.
If you love it, or just enjoy it, great. May you have many happy hours as the chosen one. Perhaps it’s just that our tastes are irreconcilable?
@@ashroskell I didn't say that Starfield is perfect. It's just you being defensive and imagining things because you know that it's impossible to NOT have loading screens in a space simulator. And that it's stupid to want no loading screens in it and travel in real time from system to system.
I don't love Starfield. It's an ok game. Not great, not bad. The worst thing about it is that it delayed the only relevant BGS game in the decade - Elder Scrolls 6.
I liked some planets (the ones with life; the one with dream home is gorgeous, for example), researching plants and animals (I took thousands of photos), I liked the main quest a lot, especially the NASA part (I spent two hours just in the museum). I liked the ship building. I really like the parents trait. I like Matteo and Walter. And Sam is cool too. I really like adoring fan, much better than in Oblivion.
I don't like the repetitive creatures, the "light chasing" minigame in temples, fact that whenever I go to menu, the game goes to 6 FPS and I must restart it... I don't like that the best NPCs (Matteo, Walter) cannot be companions. I don't like Sarah (too "dry") and Andreja (too insecure). I don't like there are almost no energy weapons in the game so taking that perk was a huge mistake.
And I absolutely hate and despise limited inventory. I consider it the biggest bug in the game. And the way how it slows you down (I once spent two real-life days in one landing area trying to move between the POIs because of that). It's inexcusable and the person who put it in the game should be severely punished.
@@dasik84 : You may interpret something I said as defensive, but I promise you, it was not. I never intimated that there should not be loading screens at all, and I think that’s where the misunderstanding arises. “Loading screen hell,” is not solved by zero loading screens. It’s the way they’re handled so poorly (there are countless videos on TH-cam showing you how cleverly devs hide loading screens these days) and put into the game for every single change of scenery; even to the point that you get a loading screen when stepping into the shop and stepping out again. But getting loading screens for getting onboard your own ship is hopelessly incompetent in my view.
So you like some aspects of Starfield and that’s fine. But if you and I were to break down some of those things you named, I would probably ruin the game for, which I don’t want to do, by demonstrating that these things are not just bad by comparison to their nearest rivals, but empirically broken by the standards of that universe’s internal logic, the standards of plotting, story telling, character development, technical commitment, care of the final product and even fundamentally (dare I say it?) immoral in places.
That is just the base game, however, since I only know shattered space vicariously by watching others’ play throughs on YT, or reading and watching reviews. Yet, I was entirely unsurprised.
I am highly critical of Bethesda about this game and even angry at them about it. Perhaps that is what you confused with defensiveness? But I assure you, nothing you say will offend me personally. And I honestly do not wish to rob you of any joy you’re getting from the game. Heck. Someone deserves to get something out of it, so it might as well be you.
To that end, you might enjoy the YT channel Crusty And The Moon Wizard? He’s really enjoying the game and he is extremely funny, with a really beautifully witty script. I’ve been getting my fun out of Starfield by watching him play it and he has something to say to the nay sayers and, “outrage farmers,” about it too. I don’t want to be one of those either. I just have some strong feelings on the issue, since I’ve been watching Bethesda slide down a morally spiralled slope for some years now. I honestly don’t believe they deserve the success they’ve had with this game, but my wife assures me I’m a grumpy, miserable old man and she’s,usually right about these things.
@@ashroskell Again, I didn't say I loved Starfield. And yes, I know that there are better games, or as you called them "nearest rivals".
I also don't and have never care(d) about "standards" of plotting, story telling and character development, because in reality, there are none. Yes, universities teach students certain rules of creative writing, but that doesn't mean those rules are objective truth. If anyone followed those rules, literature would be really boring and repetitive.
And again, I'm not saying the Starfield writing is excellent, it's not. The Paradiso quest, for example, is an insult. Insult to the players AND to the game itself. It had so much potential and they just gave up on it...
So I partly agree with you, I just don't hate the game. It's fun. It's just not great. And it's not TES6, so it's a huge minus. I'm actually genuinely interested in you opinion on how the things I said I liked defy the universe's internal logic.
Thanks for the suggestion of the YT channel, btw, I'll check it out. I love how he gave the evil haters the "outrage farmers" nickname. :)
Also, I haven't bought Shattered Space either, I'm not insane. First, the price is a robbery on a bright day, second, when MrMattyPlays, the biggest lover of Starfield, says he's disappointed, it's better no buying it, especially when it's for more than $10.