In the pipeline at some point! Truthfully, i didn’t want to make the video without having the context of the mod toolset being out, and based on the reception Starfield ended up receiving, i figure the upcoming DLC might be a bigger deal to the overall game feel than just more story stuff. TLDR: I wanted to judge the game WITH creation kit mods out, and now i’m curious to return to the game once the upcoming DLC drops since it could be hefty to the base game (if bethesdas smart it will be, anyway)
@@arkyUS_YTYeah, shattered space with over 50 new poi's on one planet (don't worry they will all still be identical copy pastes, so you'll know where to look for gear 😉)
Or that there's ship modules with jail cells built into them and there's even a variety of non-lethal weapons to knock down enemies but you can't take anyone hostage and send them to those jail cells, heck all "Eliminate X criminal" quests DEMAND that you kill the target because incapacitating them won't count. But hey, the modding community has already made functional brigs as a mod.
Yea they should really...REAALLYYY consider to stop updating after, say, year 2~3... It's not a live service game. It doesn't need constant updates. Especially because modders already did bug fixes and the like WAY better with the unofficial patch. Just let the modders finally rest already. Stop forcing them to update their mods for 10+ years...
@supesmin446 I was thinking of Skyrim, actually. Although I'm sure the power armor is nice. I like choosing my own mods. As long as they went "we are giving you some mods, but select and install them at your own leisure", id be fine. Having some corpo go "we want to do some good pr. Here's some mods we are installing for you. You cannot get rid of them if you didn't want them. I'm out, no questions"
@Mikehoncho1050 I played Skyrim vanilla for over 1000 hours before I got into modding. Skyrim was a revelation at the time, and I don't knock anyone who plays it in that state still. But millions of players do mod or created mods for Skyrim. When that game updates, every mod dependent on SKSE breaks until teams update/fix them, which can take weeks or months. But why even bother updating this game that came out in 2011, when those dev teams could be working on the newest title to improve now and faster? Fallout I get because of the TV show. And I don't hate Bethesda; I recognize that every decision they make is in the name of profit, like every other gaming company.
People forget about paid mods And how they tried to shift the blame for that to Valve...shortly after they did the Creation Club with never-ending updates that break non-CC mods Including say...a shitty CC update after years of not touching Fallout 4 just before the release of Fallout London
@@commisaryarreck3974 "just before the release of Fallout London" wow that really sounds like Bethesda wanted to cripple the greatest unofficial expansion out of the fear that it would outshine Fallout 76. Oh wait, it outshone 76 in like the first couple days of its release despite Bethesda's best efforts XD Its just really frickin cool to me when a modding team who loves the franchise partners up with a big-name game platform like GOG to make it happen near seamlessly. They love the series and they love the setting so much they even included the Warhammer model shop in Bromley
They completely fucked the exploration. Nothing else really matters. The fact that I found the same set of datapads 5 times in 1 day on 4 different planets will tell you all you need to know.
It really is a bummer, because since DAY ONE, the strongest thing Bethesda has been at is exploration and environmental detail. Why they decided to try and automate their literal bread and butter, is beyond me. Maybe they felt scale would impress people, but it really hasn’t, and I think that’s shown in spades with a ton of negative reactions to the game as a whole. Also! Thanks for the comment homie!
@@arkyUS_YT The thing is.. you really can't do space without scale. They gave us the scale, but they put nothing in it. That's really what the issue is.
@@arkyUS_YT You said: "...Starfield is a really good bethesda game". That`s not true. The lore makes no sense and nearly all quests are immersion-breaking, dumb, simplified, grind. They took many aspects of previous games and implemented them poorly, so we ended up with a version that does everything it can to disappoint. Dragonboren -> Starborn, Shouts with cool dungeons and bosses to discover -> Just point the player to a temple that is every time the same with nothing of substance, Oh you are the dragonborn? Can you help me with that dangerous thing, because you are really powerful? -> Hey random person! Please talk to dangerous people because I trust a stranger more than myself, You can build your house to store all cool unique stuff? -> You can build an outpost that is super annoying to manage and grindy to build and is destroyed after finishing the main quest Cool Interactivity and beliefable npcs with shedules etc. -> I am a doll that is supposted to be here, so I can ask you for random favors
"Minimal Contractual Obligation" is the phrase you are looking for. You see, when you own your own company, got investors and become CEO you have a major problem, a problem that comes with success: you cannot retire without tanking your own stock. When a company is recognized for having a "winning team", you cannot break up that team without investors reacting. So as the meme implies the only way the senior management can retire and keep their stock option value is to be bought out. That's right, after 30+ years the senior management were ready to retire, and who was walking down the block looking for something new for Game Pass? After 30+years in Bethesda and 7yrs going nowhere with the game, with Microsoft funding a year's deadline, with RETIREMENT within sight, the management at Bethesda provided the Minimal Contractual Obligation", they produced the legal definition of a "game" and then retired, cashing out their stock options, the moment the game released and cleared Microsoft's legal department. Go check, everyone retired one week after the game came out. "Bethesda" isn't there anymore, Todd Howard is no longer a CEO but a Microsoft employee, and I hope Microsoft fires his (censored).
I do feel some degree of “the bare minimum” when it’s come to Bethesda since Fallout 4. It bums me out because I think everyone wants a full fledged, depth focused game from them again, but when popular gameplay loops require less effort (looter shooter style, repetitious post game grinding etc) I suspect they’re seeing it as the path of least resistance, and the most optimal path into a certain subsection of game fans hearts. Thanks for the comment btw dude!
any sources to back these claims? can't find anything that confirms this on any of the financial websites, so I'm just wondering how you even came across this information without just making it up. There isn't any entries for Howard on Finviz regarding sales of MSFT, ZeniMax and BGS aren't even publicly listed stock tickers, nothing on InsiderScreener.. even searching for 'todd howard share sale' brings zero results. sooo if you can't back this up I'm calling BS. And *as much as I would love this dystopic turn of events* for BGS, so far there's no evidence for it therefore I don't buy it. And to the other point, Howard never was "CEO" of BGS. He was only the EP, Robert Altman was the "CEO" of ZeniMax.. One thing that is interesting though, MSFT waited until Altman was dead and gone before acquiring ZeniMax. But because these were privately-held companies, they didn't have to follow reporting that publicly-held companies need to be upheld to. So who knows _who_ the actual CEO of BGS was.
This explains alot, ES 1,2,3,4 are the original creators legacy as much as we want more from them they gave us endless ours of entertainment now its time for them to enjoy their lives.
Easiest way to distinguish between a "hater" and a disappointed long-time Bethesda fan? A hater says "Lol it's just Skyrim/Fallout in space." But a disappointed fan, like me, I say, "I WISH it was Skyrim/Fallout in space."
If only starfield wasn’t loading screen simulator with the same six structures reused over and over. It felt like all the worst parts of past Bethesda games
Bethesda is so complacent. They stopped trying because they didn’t feel like they had to innovate. People buying Skyrim five times sure doesn’t help. Stop it people!
I'm genuinely not sure why anyone would buy the game five times. I purchased it once, for PC, and picked up the DLCs as they launched. I received the Special Edition upgrade for free as a result, and have never once had to buy it again.
The problem is they tried to innovate too much when all we want is for them to return to their roots Fo4 build system being dogwater, fo76 build system somehow being worse, fo4 vats being drastically changed, fo76 being a multi-player disaster, all bad decisions. If the build system was good and if the multi-player was good, it would've likely been okay, but they tried to innovate and failed. They tried with starfield aswell and again, failed to innovate
Seemingly so actually! Which is a bummer, because if they keep adding depth the way the die hard want them to, I suspect they’d hook more people. I mean Balders Gate was the biggest game last year, I think we can stop babying general casual audiences! Also thanks for the comment lad, I’m a small channel so it’s super appreciated ^^
@@acetrigger1337 Brother, I’m running a non-stop subathon on my twitch, and have been live for 20 days. I respond to these comments between me sleeping, please excuse me for my single misspelling of Baldur’s Gate, a word my phone informs me is spelt wrong as it is, on a single thread.
This is unfair. What would be fair would be to say that BGS has made RPGs for people who didn't realize they liked RPGs. Plenty of people have gone from Skyrim into the RPG depths.
Serves him right, tbh. I know it’s mean to say, but the no. 1 rule is to NEVER pre-order a game. No Man’s Sky, Cyberpunk 2077, Starfield and so on… nothing guarantees you that the game will be any good once it releases, and you risk ruining the experience for yourself if the game is a buggy mess/unfinished. It took approximately 5/6 years for NMS to become great, and now I absolutely recommend it to anyone, Cyberpunk took a little more than a year, and now without the bugs it’s amazing. Pre-ordering is a big nono
Honestly? No. The reason people modded Elder Scrolls was because THEY LIKED THE UNIVERSE since morrowind The reason people modded Fallout was because THEY LIKED THE UNIVERSE Starfield's universe is the blandest piece of storytelling i've ever seen. Instead of inspiring - it actually just draws a blank for my creativity. As someone who worked on Nehrim, the sequel mod in Skyrim - i can say that i won't be touching Starfield with a 10 foot pole.
90% of mods for 4 were to overhaul base game mechanics because they were so dogshit or titties, what are you on about. 4 was a mess from the ground up lmao
Its the same logic why people write fanfics. The original IP was interesting and full of potential to create more stories. Encouraging viewers to write their own stories set within that IP. But if the IP is a just a bland corporate cookie-cutter amalgamation of milquetoast sci-fi tropes then no one is going to be interested in making stories with it.
I simply disagree. If you look at the changes in game design from morrowind on you'll notice a pattern. I knew fallout76 was inevitable. It was the culmination of every single decision made since morrowind. Starfield was their attempt to bring people back, but far too late as at this point they dont know what makes their games good. They probably believed, like cdpr, bioware, and other studios, that because theyre bethesda it'll just work out. Bethesda has taken a hammer to every single good thing they've had, including mods (with their insistence on forcing paid mods) and blame for their current situation rests entirely on their lack of imagination, inability to change, refusal to learn or take responsibility, and their greed.
I’m confused! Because wherein you disagree with me, I agree with you! Haha I do think every game has slowly but surely backed away from depth of mechanics and user impact. I even agree that Starfield brought back some of those features and ideas themselves, in order to reappeal to past fans, but like you said, they’d burned so many bridges in so many different ways, from generation to generation, franchise to franchise, and person to person, that nobody gave them the benefit of the doubt. I’m pretty sure we agree, but maybe I’m misunderstanding! Also thanks for the comment dude, I’m a small channel so it helps that you gave my video a chance, and wanted to share your own perspective too ^^
@@arkyUS_YT Maybe I misinterpreted the "and it starts with a capital X" part. Your channel is great and your humor is on point, I'll like and comment every chance I get 👍
@@IzzmonsterOh dude you’re so sweet! The Capital *S* actually is in reference to the Xbox Series S. My conspiracy theory is, Starfield has so many loading screens, and broken up content, because they were made to ensure it ran perfectly and similarity on Series S as it would on PC and X. Because modders have seemingly removed the loading screens, and for the exception of a little pop in while it loads, the game seems to do surprisingly well without loading screens! But with the Series S being less powerful and fast, I theorize they had to make the S look similar to the Series X, so they introduced the loading screens. Just my conspiracy is all ;p
@arkyUS_YT Ah! I see, very interesting I didn't know they were able to do that. Last I heard some modders were abandoning starfield so I'm glad to see it won't die out completely.
I’ve never enjoyed a Bethesda game and have them 1 last chance with Starfield…. 2/10 game and it’s by far the worst AAA major release I’ve played in sometime.
The first problem with bethesda was when they created Morrowind, they relased an outstadning game (my favourite out of their games) but it was buggy and had problems rooted in incompetent engine usage. The lesson they learned was that they can make undercooked games and still be successful. And it resulted in them making every next game less and less polished. Up to Fallout 4, it was still working, though sympthoms were clearly visibile.
would be nice if we ACTUALLY KNEW THE PROBLEM. you can be a good writer with game-compatible story that can get quashed en masse by gameplay limitations discovered after the work is already done.
Really all the talented people who made the BGS games we liked have left. BGS is never going to give you that next Morrowind or Oblivion. Just like how modern Obsidian will never give us FNV 2 because all most of people who made that game left long ago. We as gamers should focus our energy on finding the next great thing rather than wasting our time and money on companies that have long lost their mojo.
Kirkbride may be wacky, but people like him are what made the best elder scrolls and other Bethesda intellectual property stories the best ( and Skyrim and Fallout 4 have been carried by modders for most of the time they have been out) edit: fixed spelling error, i had "madders" but meant "modders"
So yeah, I'm fucking terrified of TES VI. Skyrim is an eternal game, a legendary title that will still be revered in 10+ years, I'm sure of it. Some people launched careers out of modding the game, thousands like myself feel as if Skyrim is our home from home and millions of hours have been poured into it collectively. It's a pillar of gaming culture if you're into modding and Bethesda's Magnum Opus. TES VI isn't gonna be any of that. If FO76 and Starfield are any indications, Bethesda is done, relegated to churning out soulless cashgrabs that break promises and their audience's heart. Sad story, really.
Bethesda is the toxic boyfriend who keeps saying he’ll change, but we both know he won’t. And for some reason, we keep pretending that one vacation he took us on is still worth the last 12 years of hell.
@@MysteriousPear802 it would have been, if he had taken a moment to appreciate the moment we were in, rather than looking at the past or the future the whole time.
@@kay94The whole “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mindset is the exact reason why the gaming industry is going downhill. It’s a lame excuse at ignoring innovation that should’ve been there. It’s obvious you’re a fanboy.
@@kay94 "It's game design has only slightly improved since the original dark souls." Demons souls, you *should* say. But its changed significantly- in terms of how its developed its been optimized and expanded, where as I would call bethesdas streamlined to the point of constriction. Dont underestimate how much even just simply being able to jump freely changes gameplay and combat options. Bethesda is still thinking in "point gun + shoot" levels of gameplay. Maybe some crafting but even thats not nearly as elaborate as it used to be Perhaps Jakey was glib but he wasnt wrong. the need to innovate has been a strike against bethesda since as early as oblivion where people were already complaining the mechanics had become too streamlined. Fallout 4 hit a fever pitch
Played Elden Ring & I'm absolutely unable to go back to the lame gameplay/design that comes with all Bethesda games. Melee mechanics still working like back in Skyrim, madness.
@@nokiae51yangu for real. I don’t think souls combat would translate to elder scrolls, but other rpg’s have done first person sword-play leagues above Bethesda. Kingdom come deliverance has a fantastic first person medieval combat system
@@girth_goblin elden ring's my 1st souls game, & now I want to go delve deep into the entire catalogue. Been looking forward to playing that & baldurs gate 3. After I'm done with elden ring (several hundred hours). These guys & ubisoft don't stand a chance... & All these other games passing cutscenes for gameplay
@@nokiae51yangu you totally should, they’re fantastic games. I recommend dark souls 3. The combat, the lore, the difficulty; it’s all perfect. Dark souls 1 is also an absolute masterpiece though
@@alexwalters35 I disagree. The polish of those games is absolutely something that Bethesda could accomplish - they just don’t. Look at baldurs gate and Elden ring. Every nook and cranny is masterfully sculpted. Animations are impactful, levels and encounters are thoughtfully designed, and the voice acting is impeccable. All of these things come together to create a world that feels real. Bethesda games have none of that. I genuinely believe Todd thinks “big space to explore = good game”, because every other element is lazy. Bethesda is terrified to let the player have an impact on the game world. Animations and gunplay are weightless, voice acting is garbage, and interesting quests are non-existent. Hell, they couldn’t even bother to create explosion animations for the in-game water. It’s lazy, boring, and sterilized. Todd could learn from baldurs gate and Elden ring, but he’s only interested in dumbing down the one revolutionary game he’s ever created: morrowind.
Your final statement i cant agree with. Starfield is a typical Bethesda game, yet their worst one to date. All the weaknesses are excarberated, all the strengths shrunked to the absolute minimum, the few improvements to be expected not worth the effort to name them.
NMS has a lot to do and a lot of freedom in how you do it, but is very much so a game where you make your own goals with what you want to accomplish. It's far from perfect but the love the devs have put into continuously updating the game keeps me coming back every update or so for a while to check out what new stuff has been added (pirate dreadnought battles are pretty fun). Doesn't hurt to add that they literally added free VR support instead of having to buy a whole separate version of the same game unlike bethesda....@DorisDay-lw4xs
@DorisDay-lw4xs They added a lot but it's still boring and empty. It's really not this amazing game people portray it to be. If it's cheap then it's worth picking up but it ain't all that.
@DorisDay-lw4xs i honestly can't recommend NVM as a Starfield replacement. it's a somewhat space sim, while Starfield is not a space sim, it's an RPG that happen to be in space. they not even trying to compete with Space sim game, It's an RPG game, expect it to be played like an RPG game also space sim is boring & somewhat repetitive if you're not used to it. for me, No Man's Sky is boring, and i never had issue with exploration game like Minecraft, NMS is just empty & repetitive. Despite people trashing about Starfield, it's still a Stronger game that will constantly reward you within 50+ hours of your gameplay. it's still a Bethesda game, the game shares 70% of its genetics from Skyrim and Fallout. the RPG & Stats element of Starfield is just as good as Fallout 4. everyone who played the game played it for 200+ hours, despite them criticizing the game hard. so don't get fooled by the trash talker. it's still a good game it just people hated Bethesda, because they made a bad decision in the past like Elder scroll online and Fallout 76, which makes a lot of people very salty about Bethesda. they took a very respected game, and made a Mid online game out of it. so, people used Starfield as a Punching bag.
Dog you had me until you said “starfield is a pretty good *bethesda game*” and while this may sound hyperbolic I genuinely think starfield is objectively their worse video game ever made. I’d literally rather play 76 because I can enjoy their jank and shit stories with a friend. Starfield…too long for me to point out why it’s their worse video game and I refuse to call it good.
@@thecocktailian2091 No it does not, it is worst launch there is no argument there, but it is far from a bad game right now. The story is not great but it is passable, most of the mechanics are working and are pretty fun, they added a ton of content, there is always something happening in the game, the community is amazing and content updates are fairly regular even if not big. The biggest problem with 76 right now in my opinion is late game content, there is not much of it. Also the game is not pay to win, it is pay to spend less time grinding materials but that’s fairly common in mmoarpgs
@@EdgyADudeit's still their worst release because they literally hyped and marketed it with lies and false advertising then refused to refund people. What they did with 76 is technically illegal in my country, but who's taking a dev to court over
@@Loctorak you don’t know how the game looks like late game don’t you? If you WANT to get all the best gear, you will have to grind no matter what. You don’t need that gear to play and you can do everything in the game maybe just a tad slower than fully optimized character. If you don’t want to grind for best gear it just changes the game from I don’t have to go out for resources to I need to spend like 3 hours a month to get some things that I’m low on. And most people won’t even do that because they will just look if they are low on something and gather it while doing other things or just buy it because money in that game does not have a lot of uses.
@@wyattgeorge9696 Game companies were after money way before microtransactions were a thing. This is a business. - Even a small 5-person indie studio that pays each employee 40,000/year needs 200K yearly in salaries, plus fixed expenses (rent, licenses, hardware, bills, etc), meaning a 2 year project costs half a million before it even breaks even. - Extrapolate that to 10 people, and you're a million down the drain in 2 years. 100 people? 10 million. - And the above figures are for a TWO year project. So many titles take way more than that to hit the market. ... i don't think you realize how expensive making these cultural products really is.
@wyattgeorge9696 No, at the end of the day game studios and publishers are and always have been buisnesses. It's always been about the money. The difference is that back in the day the thing that sold and turned a profit was good art. Games that genuinely innovated, and were enjoyable to play. Now that consumers buy any unfinished, unoriginal, and uninspired garbage these companies try to sell them without a second thought, they have no reason to spend the time, money, and effort to actually make a decent game. We as consumers and gamers vote with out dollar, and it is our, and only our falt that the gaming industry is in the state that it is. Its time to take responsibility, to take a stand, and make the changes we want to see.
I mean we have: - A near infinite pool of the same copy-pasted bs that feels machine generated. - An RPG without a single good character - A main story with zero stakes - A multiverse hopping adventure where you can't make any radical changes or kill protected NPCs. - A sci-fi where the writers think that the vacuum of space is some kind of cold substance. Man, remember when console exclusive use to mean "big system selling games" and not "minimum effort they'll play it anyway"?
no, if ESO & Fallout 76 were never happened, people won't lash it out on Starfield. it just the frustration finally blew up. people nitpicking every single mistake on Starfield. without ESO & Fallout 76, we probably will get Elder scroll 6, and Fallout 5 sooner, but it never happened because they put all of their precious resources into a resources hungry online game. Starfield is a good game, and it have a lot room for improvement i had a lot of time in Starfield, from - Capturing enemies ships, - appreciating the Ship interior, - Play as a crazy role like a debt collector or Corporate Hitman, - go into a random industrial outpost and just having a great adventure looting around. - building and connecting a multiple outpost - Ship battle - Weapon, spaceship, and other Mods, which they did a great job in this one - Perks are also get a glow up from Fallout 4 - Massive Graphics boost, no more low res texture and Low poly assets, everything is high res, ray traced and believeable. - Level design in starfield is Great, this is what i really love about Fallout 4 as well. it took Elder scroll 5 game before reaching a Mainstream success, and you expect starfield to do it in one single title? how unreasonable can you be? It's a new IP that have more potential to be a truly great game with couple of fix or in Starfield 2. Why don't you work at bethesda first and see, all of that they do was "Minimum Effort" or not? i bet you can't even create a single Character or even a single Spaceship. you're not even stronger than the weakest Bethesda Dev, but you talk as if you're a big shot yourself
@@jensenraylight8011 What are you talking about? No, actually what? Great level design? You sure loved flying through those hoops I guess. Or replaying the same "outpost" located and populated with bo rhyme or reason over and over again. Weapon mods, what? Weapons don't improve with levels, why bother with mods if you're gonna pick up the same gun with better stats two levels drom now. Space combat is so barebones it's nothing. Yeah, customise your ship to kill time and make another "Batwing in Starfield" tweet, but there's no reason. The only funny thing was that the same donut ship trick from Kingdom Hearts 2 seemed to work for some peope And I don't need to "work at Bethesda" or "see you make a game" or whatever version of that tired old fallacy you prefer, because for an example of doing a decent job writing a world and characters I could point to their own games before they gave the fuck up trying. Maybe you have tolerance levels adequate to enjoy nothing plots in static worlds of AI generated dungeons, but we use to have better from the same studio. They didn't sell it like an experimental new IP, they marketed it like "the next big thing from the creators of all those famous things". And yes, I'm no Bethesda Dev, I'm the consumer. And this product was a fucking disappointment. They use to do better. Damn, they didn't even do cities populated by NPCs, they just spawned dozens of "Citizens" going to the next door to despawn while most merchants and quest givers are nailed to their posts 24/7. Remember when NPCs had lives and schedules and relations? But sure anything that's not a glowing praise is a nitpick to some people, no matter how glaring the issue is in your space RPG where you don't know how fucking space works.
@@demilung good good, don't delete your comment, let the whole world see how pathetic and unreasonable a man can be, trying too hard to hate something And also the cherry on top, the fact that you even beaten the game, meaning that it's actually a good game, because if you actually hate it like how you describe it in your long ass essay that you wrote, you won't played past the first 5 hours mark, Your word was contradicting I don't have any problem with people nitpicking stuff, i had a problem with people nitpicking stuff but ignoring all the good stuff as if it wasn't exist, giving other people Biased opinion
I haven't played starfield, but if hundreds of thousands to millions of people say they got sick for weeks and shat their intestines out for eating something, I'm not going to eat that ok? I have played all their games before starfield, and the pattern was clearly going in this direction so I believe the complaints. Also, if they make a bad product I want them used to people not buying it. If people buy the bad stuff they make just to confirm it's trash, you'll just hear the typical "MORE COPIES SOLD THEN EVER!!!" bull
@@ryanabernathy4144 Obsidian has released several successful games since. It's not for nothing Microsoft elected to acquire them. While I haven't actually played most of them (especially the more recent titles, due to being swamped with options!), I can personally attest that Pillars of Eternity and its sequel are pretty good games. The weird sense of tribalism people get about video game companies is just bizarre. It really does highlight humanity's poo flinging roots.
Also the issue if you listen to game designers is that the game itself is so flawed that it can't be fixed. For instance the load screens are inevitable because of the creation engine.
@@jfkst1 It isn't that the game itself has so many Bugs but that those Bugs aren't within the reach of Modders, so that they are litterally like a pimple that can't be popped if you know what i mean
oh yea, It’s biggest strength besides modability is that it’s really good with physical simulation of objects. Except it’s something that was rarely used. And don’t forget the modding tools that promised. I thought you liked moders Bethesda! Where are the modding tools.
I'm sorry but there are very weird takes in this video, so I feel the need to make a critic of your critic: 1. Around the 24-minute mark you spend a long tangent on the modability of BGS games being one of the reasons for their instability. Not only this is objectively wrong (a lof of the bugs are due to simple coding mistakes (stats not acting as they should, quest flags, etc.)), but specifically in "Starfield"'s case the modding tools haven't been released yet and the modding community have come out and pointed out how "Starfield" is actually not mod-friendly. That's one of the main reasons why modders aren't interested in making mods for the game (that and general disinterest). And their most bugged game "Fallout 76", is an online game, which naturally makes it a poor choice for modding (which is why it has very few mods). Furthermore, most of the complaints for "Starfield" have nothing to do with the bugs. In fact, most of the critics seem to agree that Starfield is their most stable release so far. 2. Around the 16/17 minute mark you talk about players not playing the game and just regurgitating complaints they heard elsewhere...While showing Steam reviews. Which can't be posted unless you have bought the game, and clearly show the total playtime of the review: the first one having 6h, second 4h, third 6h, then nearly 10h and the last one seemingly around 4h. Implying that those people who BOUGHT THE GAME, and played it for HOURS, might be arguing in bad faith and just regurgitating critics they've already heard for "social media standing capital". This is all right before saying "I'm not talking about people who played the games and faced issues". Which is it then? Are you implying that those people on Steam somehow pirated the system just to leave bad reviews? If those reviews aren't what you're supposedly talking about in that moment, why even show them here then? Wouldn't random YT comments or Reddit posts of people who clearly haven't played the game be a more appropriate way to illustrate that point? It only feels like a poor attempt at undermining the validity of critics about Starfield. 3. The take on Fallout 3 is quite weird. You start out by saying that the complaints came later, before later acknowledging that fans of Fallout complained about the changes from day 1. This is especially weird when there are numerous complaints about the game (especially the ending) from all the way back to 2008 and 2009 (I will remind you that it was released at the end of October). People didn't "change their minds" about F3, the complaints were always there. 4. The console exclusive point is just as baffling. Most critics literally do not care about console wars, especially now. People hate Starfield because they think it's a boring bland game full of loading screens, that's the main point I got across from all the various critics I've seen. The worst is that you acknowledge yourself that this is no longer relevant, yet kept the point in your video. Again, it feels like a poor attempt at undermining the validity of critics about Starfield rather than adressing them (which you refuses to do, which is fine, but why poison the well then?). 5. Let me speak quickly about "Elden Ring". Yes I'm am writing that comment, after watching the video. The big difference between in the relationship between "Elden Ring" and "Dark Souls" ("Dark Souls 3" would be more fair for this comparison) versus "Oblivion" and "Skyrim", is that From Software built on the "Dark Souls" formula to create a game that not only correct issues it had (some stats being somewhat useless, a lack of liberty in how to tackle levels specifically in DkS 3, a seemingly undercooked story that rethreaded too much on familiar ground only to be saved by its much superior DLC storyline, weapon arts being a lackluster new addition (too weak to be worth the use), magic being nerfed into the ground especially miracles) but it also added new mechanics (Spirit Summons, horse riding, truly open world, jumping, night & day cycle, guard counter as well as crouching and stance breaking (even if those two are taken over from Sekiro, they weren't in Souls games)). On top of that, it's undeniably the Fromsoft "Souls-like" with the most content so far whether it's in terms of weapons, armor, bosses, magic, dungeons, etc. And even on top of all of that, ER detractors did complain that the game is "just" "open-world Dark Souls". So ER isn't even the best example for your point here. Meanwhile, Bethesda RPGs aren't simply "the same" as the previous ones. What's specifically being criticized (which you later talk about) is the "dumbing-down" of Bethesda games. After "Daggerfall", players expected "more". "Morrowind" was a somewhat weird response to that demand since while it was technically smaller than "Daggerfall", it had far more hand-crafted content than "Daggerfall"'s procedurally generated world and copy-pasted sprites. After that "Oblivion" had fewer skills than "Morrowind", less magic (which also meant fewer means of traversal), fewer weapon types, fewer factions, fewer equipment slots, etc. All on top of retconning previously established lore about Cyrodiil that fans were looking forward to (dragons, dragon riders, how various Daedric Planes are supposed to look, the jungle, the Colovian/Nibenay cultural split, the influence of war mages over Cyrodiil, the various cults of Cyrodiil, the architecture of the Imperial City itself, even down to the Imperials suddenly no longer having roman-inspired designs, etc.). It got even worse with Skyrim straight up ditching Attributes and spellmaking altogether, not adding any new weapon type (except crossbows making a comeback in the Dawnguard DLC), having even fewer factions, retconning more of the lore, adding nonsensical lore, etc. All on top of not fixing already existing issues (boring combat, uninteresting storyline). So yes while the take that "there is nothing necessarily wrong with sequels being similar to past games!" is absolutely true, in this context, it's very much a false equivalency. Because not only it's not the main issue, but even FromSoft has made more changes to its melee combat system than BGS did (guard counter, weapon arts, and posture-breaking). With all that being said, I 100% agree with some of your other points and the idea that the current backlash is the result of a death by a thousand cuts.
The take in the video was a very romanticized sort of critique, peppered with lack of research on certain topics, especially on the programming side of the game, otherwise he, indeed, would have had no logical reason to ramble on about the modability of Starfield -- which is quasi-nonexistent, compared to previous releases.
I will critique the second point the hours played part doesn't really change the critique with the effect of reviews and our social nature being hijacked. yes they have played the game but how much of their experience was effected by the hoard of negativity around it. Did the traversal actually bother you the first 4 hours you played it or only after someone told them it should? I'm having this issue right now, having played it last year and moving on to coming back seeing the visceral reactions online and questioning myself, did I actually enjoy it? Am i allowed to enjoy it? Which I did to the point that went back to play it and still enjoy it, it's padded out and focused way to much on aspects that don't help the game but it's one of the best 7 out of 10 games ive played. But what of the mass audience of people whose opinions were soured by the online discorse. Their opinions altered to avoid being cast aside by the pack. To see These 2s and 3s out of 10's (which by the way I believe must be socially induced hyperbole for a game that at least turns on and provides a function as a competent shooter I can't see it below a 5, as they say being average is a death sentence) "oh I don't want to be wrong I should bring the game down a bit" we are social creatures we dont want to be left behind its brought the narrative around a "fine" game to being the epitamy of the worst thing in gaming.
@@cookie8162Same faulty logic can be applied to the 8s, 9s & 10s the game got at launch, after the blatantly obvious "paid" reviews from the majority of US gaming & tech outlets. So the point of your critique is moot. :) It's a 6/10 experience, at best. And, for an AAA game that was supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, the palate cleanser after that embarrassing Redfall fiasco, this savior of the XBOX way of life, it failed miserably & unequivocally. And this is coming from a Game Pass Ultimate subscriber, so save any SonyPony rhetoric for someone else.
I grew up playing bethesda games, quite literally. Morrowind, oblivion, skyrim, fo3, and fonv were all amazing games, but a few of them were also a bit behind the times when they were made. Fo4 was a good game, but it wasnt a good fallout. Then fo76...yikes. this game needed to be their savior, they flopped With fo4 they tried to innovate too much. A brand new build system, changing the game mechanics with vats, massive weapon modifications, etc. The weapons part was cool, but the building system is atrocious and somehow got worse with fo76 Their next massive mistake was letting a small team that wasnt even their A list team develope fo76. A title in one of the most successful game series of all time that wasnt also going to be made online. This shouldve been handled by their best employees, but it wasnt Then, starfield. Its not a bad game, but it isnt good either. The worst thing about starfield is they were so damn close to making an amazing game, but fell short at nearly every turn. No water exploration, yikes. The characters almost all have no personality, even though bethesda is good at making good characters typically. No melee??? How did they fail to make melee when they made skyrim? One of the most played games of all time??? They also let artificially generated shi take up way too much space. They needed more hand crafted areas, way more. They needed to also have limits so people stop running into the exact same building on 12 different planets in a row. They simply couldve designed way more buildings so you only run into similar builds a hand ful of times and it wouldnt be hard because its ai generated They tried to innovate way too much when all we want is for them to stay with their roots and be a fire studio again, not a dumpster fire studio
Starfield's fail might save TES VI. If bethesda is willing to learn, but so far their reactions to critque towards starfield has been so stubborn, that i have no hope at this point for TES VI.
Bethesda learning somthing? People have told them repetedly why things are not good for decades in their games, yet they do f all about it. And with Starfield they dubbled down even trippeled down on the feed back. Bethesda isen't going to learn jack S unless Microsoft TELLS them to get their S together. I higly doubt the next Elderscrolls game is gonna be any where near as good as skyrim was. And honestly skyrim wasent that good either, it was okey. Got better with mods, especially mods that added it's own storry and quests.
All I can say is, I barely made it to 50-60 hours on Starfield but my current god knows how manyeth Skyrim save is already at 80 hours and I still come home from work excited to play Skyrim
I just think, once you have a favorite BGS game, and see that the modding community is alive, everything following it looks like a lesser version of your current favorite. They pointed out Balder’s Gate 3 and Cyberpunk before Starfield launched, and had to preempt that “while we see those games, gamers shouldn’t expect an identical experience as those when playing Starfield” Basically informing us ahead of time “This is gonna be kinda shallow compared to those games” So at least they know where the industry is going, but whether they follow suit or not, will remain to be seen in ES6. Thanks for your comment btw dude, super appreciate you for it :)
Funny, I have never finished Skyrim. I enjoy it very much don't get me wrong. I have started a few saves over the years and put close to 100 hours in. My love for Starfield has made me want to finish it once and for all. I don't remember much about fallout 4 it has been so long, I am waiting on the next gen upgrade to finish that again. So, Starfield has reinvigorated my love for Bethesda and FPRPGS. On the other hand I am at about 160 hours with Starfield and I just started a new stealth pirate build with parents and the dream home starting perks. I am still seeing things I didn't in my first run. New game Plus is ridiculously neat as well. I don't want to ruin it, but the story essentially continues after the main questline is over with different little events and subtleties that make it different every time and there is no limit to the amount of playthroughs. I highly recommend jumping back in once the expansion releases. If you can get over the need for fast traveling and mediocre exploring at times, it is a pretty fantastic RPG that is slowly improving and will only get better.
@@Neognostic-pk5wu lol nope. Just some 36 year old dude in Canada. Starfield is still in the top twenty most played on Xbox. A ton of people are still playing on Xbox compared to steam. It's not like I am the only one who loves the game.
@@lotsathedetox well, there's no accounting for mediocrity or the people shilling for it. Not sure why you'd share that here though, given it's clear where other people stand and you aren't going to change those people's minds by telling them about your 160hrs in game, or robotically writing about the "subtleties" in a game that has no sense of differing consequences and plays out the same on every quest, forcing you to play it one way. So why did you brainfart on here?
I'm not saying modding is a bad thing but saying that modders will add so much to the great template bethesda made is such a bethesda fan thing to say. A game should be good on its own and shouldnt be fixed by the community other games that are considered great also have just as big modding community so it's hardly any excuse for them to say but you can mod our game
If the modders are doing a much better job than the devs, then something is terribly wrong with the devs, and that's one way we should all use to evaluate them.
Devs are doing what they are told to do. I work with some of them and it's always frustrating to see your work change because of corporate decision, usually money driven. Some of the best modders are devs and work in the industry so they have the skills, just not the freedom.
This is always such an ignorant narrative. Modders take a finished game and are handed finished modding tools, and then have infinite time and 0 oversight to do whatever they want without having to worry about their changes working well with what someone else is trying to do. Developers can never have that freedom because everything they do has to work with everything every other dev on the team is doing, and they have to finish by specific dates.
There's also a limited number of Devs vs an ever increasing number of modders with ideas eating away at them, the skills to execute and nowbthe platform to do so
Also bear in mind the survival bias: You only see the successful modders. If a mod is bug ridden, then the mod wont get attention and nobody says that the modders are garbage
@@EccentricMeat Yes... But how do you explain the difference in quality between what Bethesda is doing and what the others game dev studios are doing? And how do you explain the inherent similarities between Starfield and Skyrim? They haven't made a game from scratch.
My obsevation with BGS is in each new game they release they add some shiny new features that add little to no depth while removing old ones that do. F4 added more cinematic dialogue with a voice player but the dialogue was very basic and limited compared to FNV who even took in account skill levels. Player agency seems to get worse every new entry. They are leaning on the you are special gimmick, dragonborn, starborn even with F4 they were contemplating to give the player special powers. The BGS formula is an old brick wall they keep removing bricks from while adding new paint hoping the paint somehow holds it together.
(Please note that i am talking on a TECHNICAL standpoint, since we have more than 4 options in dialogue and the protagonists words arent entirely voiced except for alternate universe selves).
After playing Witcher 3, Cyberpunk 2077 (after CDPR fixed it), and Baldur's Gate 3, I cannot bring myself to go back to Bethesda's library of mediocre slop.
this is a great take. i enjoyed skyrim as a 12 year old, and the nostalgia is nice to look back on, but compared to those games you mentioned, they make skyrim look like a text based adventure. 80% of the content in skyrim is just repetitive mindless combat and the other 20% is weak stories at best. looking back, nothing of the story is really memorable or interesting
I was playing Starfield and BG3 around the same time but eventually dropped starfield and never finished it. I did finish BG3 and start multiple more playthroughs though :) Played TW3 and 2077 afterwards then now Fallout 4 since it was on sale for quite a good price and man the difference is quite stark. Bethesda ain't all bad but they definitely are not the icon people (used to) make them out to be. 6/10 games that are fine and serviceable but nothing special.
And this is the problem with all modern gamers you're all hooked on those super high-tech cutting-edge next-gen copy paste bullshit that's a game even looks slightly less graphically advanced you will not play it we didn't have this kind of problem back in the Golden age gaming
And also don't call starfield mediocre when cyberpunk 2077 is no better they spent way too much time on the graphics and not enough on anything else hyping the game up for 7 years to release a barely functional mediocre piece bland overrated garbage
@@Doyoueverwonderwhywerehere When did we ever say we played the games listed for the graphics? Sure Cyberpunk is known for looking good but guess what, most people don't have a GPU that can run it up to those fancy levels. The other two mentioned look good but aren't graphics focused at all. Have you played both Cyberpunk and Starfield? If you have please explain how Cyberpunk is bland compared to Starfield.
My honest issue with them Is todd. His entire stated design philosophy is "To look at a game and where others are adding mechanics to their game Im looking to Find mechanics to remove." Also the fucked up the tone of fallout and i hate them for that two reselling skyrim 30 times didnt help either.
No zeitgeist crap for me I paid 115 dollars of my hard earned money to place a dull, passive, not awe inspiring at all. Story was broken and up itself and the lack of basic features was a joke. Honestly I am a 39 year old man why have Bethesda lost their ability to take risks, not even a single character swore or drank booze or drugs or even did anything slightly edgy, the whole game felt on rails PG kid safe ESG shitfest. Don’t even get me started on the wank followers all being goody goody knobs. The game oozes fear of modern weirdos finding any problematic in the game just shoot bad guy be hero select pronoun eat bugs woooooo.
This is why i just pirate everything now and only buy it if its any good. Cant trust them to not make garbage, cant trust reviews because they are all idiots also.
Not to get all gray-beard on you, but I was just out of college when Arena came out. I found it by chance in an Electronics Boutique and loved it. Games weren't wildly advertised then, so I was lucky to find it. It was unbelievable for the time. The 3D rendering, full screen (as opposed to Ultima Underworld's version, which was a small window) just blew me away. You commented about the "dumbing down" of successive Elder Scrolls game, you're right. It started immediately. I loved Daggerfall, in spite of being buggy as hell -- but they eliminated the Passwall spell from Arena, which many fans complained about as "dumbing down." It continued with the loss of flying in Morrowind. So, yeah, Bethesda has been headed down this path for a long time, gradually distilling the RPG experience into an action game. It kinda sucks, and after Starfield, I have given up hope they even know how to make an open-world RPG. I barely give a damn about the next Elder Scrolls game, for the first time in decades.
Not a chance! I actually wish I had your anecdotal experience to further enrich the “dumbing down” section further, because I had no idea it had been happening even before Morrowind! Major shame they’re going the ways they’re going, it seems everyone who grew up with them get to watch them dilute themselves into literal water. Thanks for the comment though buddy! I’m a super small channel, so they’re always mega appreciated :)
I still want to go back and play the first two. There's a TH-cam creator that kind of tutorializes it the same way Zizaren does Path of Exile (I've made four level 90s and might understand 20%of the game?) But Oblivion was the first I got sucked into, a friend tutorialized the game with me and I *was* there. I was the sneaky cat man in the dungeon. And when I got to the dark brotherhood (and was admittedly very stoned) I was talking to a voice acted vampire in charge of an assassin's guild. That felt like the pinnacle first person "this is dungeons and dragons digitally". When Skyrim came out I don't think I put 10 hours into it. SkyUI was great. But when I got my Quest 2, Skyrim VR (with mods) it made it actually playable and immersive. I still despise the reworked menu compared to oblivion and the stat changes.
@@ceninant, keep in mind that Arena and Daggerfall are going to be rough. Maybe check them in reverse order, just to acclimate yourself. Use Daggerfall Unity, rather than the original (there was no mouselook; it wasn't a thing, then). Arena hasn't had a remake, so it's going to feel pretty primitive. Hell, it felt primitive by 2005 -- but the freedom given to the player is pretty amazing, even if the controls might make you cry in pain.
@JHiggins67 I'd enjoy to see how "grey-beards" as you put it would design a modern RPG leveraging both modern technology and your experience in D&D and RPG experiences with reflects to mechanics, world building, etc. Always been one for enjoying more complex games than "follow the yellow brick road" ones so to speak.
I remember when Starfield came out because I got Outer Worlds the week before. Everybody called "the Poor Man's Starfield" but now I'm the one laughing and enjoying a $40 investment instead of decrying my $70 investment.
my dogass old laptop made me unable to play AAA games in recent years, it made me check out the indie space where games are less demanding, there i discovered the joy of gaming again, where innovation is still well and alive. now when i see people got disillusioned by the gaming industry i always recommend them to check out indies. good games do still exist people, you're only looking at the wrong place
The difference between fromsoft is that they expand on mechanics and gameplay loops found in previous titles, whereas bethesda seems to regress in design with every additional title.
I don't have the game but have watched many playthroughs on youtube from various people. I can't help but be reminded of other games. Mass Effect, Outer Worlds. It feels like ideas have been directly lifted from other games. How did this take 25 years? If ever Elder Scrolls 6 is released I don't hold out much hope tbh.
The Mass Effect vibes are REAL strong throughout, until you realize all the aliens are missing and then you wind up considering running another run of Mass Effect Trilogy lmao! Thanks for the comment btw! As a small channel, it’s insanely appreciated ^^
I am a very old gamer. I go back to the Atari 2600, the 8-bit computers, and the golden age of the quarter-eating arcades. When I discovered and played Daggerfall (many years after release), I had already seen other game studios and beloved franchises go through their life cycles and finally go into terminal decline. Daggerfall was unlike anything I had previously encountered. Its world was huge (albeit also very empty and very repetitive - sound familiar, anyone?), and its RPG systems had a level of depth and complexity that few other games came close to matching. It was also janky and buggy, and it could be unbalanced at times - either too difficult or far too easy. I hadn't played many 3-D games at the time and preferred (and still do) a top down view, so it was hard to get used to it. By the time I finished Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion were out, so as soon as I acquired a computer capable of running them (for a long time, my computers were not up to date in gaming capability, so I usually played games that were rather old), I moved on in the series. Ultimately, Morrowind ended up being my favorite. Its systems are somewhat simplified from Daggerfall, but there is still enough for an old RPG fan to chew on. What Morrowind got right, and in a way that I hadn't seen since Ultima VII, was an open world that had a real sense of place, was full of hidden places and little secrets to discover, and truly felt lived-in, full of people and full of assorted junk to collect. Bethesda has never been great at standard narrative or quest design, but with Morrowind and the subsequent games, all the way through Fallout 4, Bethesda picked up where Origin Systems left off when the Ultima series went into decline, and they took environmental storytelling to a new level. I can tolerate the mediocre stories, the jankiness, the lore inconsistencies, the oversimplified systems, and the annoying action combat, but if the seamless exploration and environmental storytelling ever fall off, then the whole structure will crumble. I haven't bought Starfield yet. I know better than to buy a Bethesda game shortly after launch. Unfortunately, I see some troubling signs from reviews and game play videos. The unnecessarily huge size, and with it a heavy reliance on procedural generation and the resultant emptiness and repetitiveness, gives off strong Daggerfall vibes to me. Daggerfall was a fascinating experiment for its time, but it is not a fun game world to explore after the novelty of its size wears off. Nowadays, the concept of Daggerfall in space with simplified systems is not particularly innovative. In addition, the invisible walls and the broken-up nature of the world (which Daggerfall does not have) will likely detract from the experience. However, if Bethesda comes up with some meaty expansions and the modders treat the empty spaces as blank canvases on which to build their own rich and interesting worlds, Starfield could come into its own in a few years. It might have descended into mediocrity and therefore might not have the same magic as earlier titles such as Morrowind, but it might eventually be fun to traipse around in its broken-up universe while largely ignoring the main quest, much as I do with Skyrim and Fallout 4. Given the problems with Fallout 76 and Starfield, my perception is that Bethesda is in a state of decline, much as Origin Systems was at the tail end of Ultima VII and more clearly with Ultima VIII. Sadly, Ultima IX was a disaster, and it was the bitter end of Ultima as a single player franchise. (Ultima Online was a successful spin-off, but I don't want other people in my games, so it was never relevant to me.) I would hate to see Bethesda follow a similar trajectory. Starfield has received a lot of criticism, but it has sold well and isn't a complete disaster. However, if the trend doesn't turn around and a vitally important release such as Elder Scrolls 6 fails, that could be the end for the single player games, and as with Ultima, all that is left might be a couple online games that somehow hold onto enough of an audience to persist.
Phenomenal write up, and I agree through and through! I experienced similar concerns in another video I did on Starfield, and mentioned how absolutely make or break ES6 was going to be for them. Fallout 76 could have been written off as a B-Team game in regard to plausible deniability. But with Starfields vast, and unnecessary emptiness and hollow open world design philosophy, it’s beginning to become impossible to deny what’s in front of us. If they don’t nail ES6, I do wonder what lasting impact that could have on their structure and ambitions. Here’s hoping for a successful ES6 launch, but…I just don’t know anymore :/ Thanks for the comment btw heather! Super appreciate the comment as a small channel ^^
This resonates pretty heavily with me even though I wasn't introduced to Bethesda until Fallout 3. The exploration and environmental storytelling is what keeps me coming back more than anything, and I'm okay with much of the other jank thats there so long as there's effort to make things better with each new entry. Definitely concerned with where they're going, and hoping they take some of the criticism to heart. I gather you're not a fan of other people in your game, but seeing as you enjoyed fallout 4, it may be worth trying fallout 76 if you haven't. I know it had a pretty atrocious launch, but it's come a long way from start, and offers some solid exploration fun and can be played in your own private world. I feel it, like Starfield, had potential to be much better had they given it more honest effort.
As an OG gamer myself, I can tell you that if you enjoyed all the other Bethesda games you will like it. It is a victim of the internet hate campaigns. I could make a video about a ton of games and pick at the stuff I don't like or if I changed my mindset everything could be dumb and terrible. The critic reviews are the most accurate takes you will get versus content creators with an agenda. Reviewers are just gamers like us who might be better at writing. Clearly, nobody was paid off either because the biggest outlets like GameSpot and IGN had two of the lower scores at 7/10 and those are the ones they would go after. I have never been so into a game with so much hate. I have learned a lesson with this game. I will ALWAYS try something before I decide if I like it or not. Some TH-camr who is no different, no better than you or I, isn't going to have the same likes, dislikes, agendas, wants, needs whatever. I am not picking on this guy either, I am picking on everyone who jumped on the hate bandwagon to Maryland. I guarantee that this game will be looked at favorably down the road just like Oblivion and Fallout 4.
@@lotsathedetox Hate campaigns are a common problem, so while I will consider the information that is out there (and I see some things that concern me), I won't come to a final judgment about Starfield until I get around to trying the game for myself. Bethesda games, and for that matter, many other large and ambitious games, are generally a better experience after they have had a few years to cook. I'm in no hurry. In two or three years, I'll give it a go and see how things have shaken out. Ultima VIII, which looked horrible when it came out, eventually got some patches that mitigated some of the worst of its issues, such as the platforming that had no business ever being in an Ultima game. I tried the final fixed version many years later and, while it still has problems and isn't the greatest Ultima experience, there are a lot of interesting ideas at its core, and it is a fun world to explore. Even when a series or game studio is in decline, a game might still be worth playing. Looking at Starfield from the outside, it looks to me like an Ultima VIII-type situation is the worst case scenario.
@@Carlisle73 I've heard that Fallout 76 has improved. It might be fun to explore, but I have resisted online multiplayer games for all of my gaming life. I have No Man's Sky, but I play it offline and have never connected to the servers. If No Man's Sky didn't have that option, it wouldn't be in my collection. Gaming is a solitary activity for me, and I don't like the idea of someone else being out there in the game world, even if I am unlikely to encounter them. (Also, for reasons related to game ownership and preservation, I reject all games that have an always-online requirement.) If an offline single player game ever exists on the Fallout 76 map, I'll give it a try.
You tried, man. For real. But Starfields biggest problem is the fact that it is, actually, not a very good game. And, imo, not a very good Bethesda game, either. I gave it a fair shot on release. Without watching or hearing anything. In fact, my friends talked about how great their time with the beta was. And I was quite excited after watching the Xboz showcase, too. Refunded it after 10 hours citing technical problems. It was boring. With bland characters and cardboard-like world. And it's quite disheartening, cause the game really did have potential. But did not have a creative vision that would shape it in a better way.
Bethesda is the old saying “If you try to please everybody you’ll end up pleasing nobody.” And starfield is THE culmination of that. Is it a space sim? Barely. Is it an RPG? Barely. Is it a survival game? No. Is it action adventure? Barely. It wants to be everything but it can’t just settle. Even a fundamentally good narrative and world building can be enough to save a game. Morrowind and New Vegas are really good examples of this within Bethesda lol. Although those games knew exactly what they wanted to be, which starfield doesn’t. The opposite can also be true. Fallout 4 has pretty terrible story but is actually a genuinely good dungeon crawler, I literally only play it to shoot and loot the vaults, military bases, etc…
I don't think keeping their ancient engine for modding purposes is a good enough excuse. I think doing things in order to support modders is good, like Larian adding official mod support to BG3, but choosing to NOT do something in the name of supporting modders is just actively being lazy, and in Bethesda's case, is just hurting the experience for everyone who chooses to play without mods.
I think the reason all Bethesda games are a certain way is because they all have to adhere to the rules of their creation engine that can only make games in certain ways. Probably the same reason Fallout suddenly became a first person game instead of an isometric one.
The base engine is a lot more versatile than what Bethesda actually does with it. The original Gamebryo was made with 'action RPG's' in mind, but was used in a lot of other games; even Civilization used it at one point. It can do an isometric game if thats what you want to make. Bethesda are just...well, a bit sh*t to be honest.
It's what you get when the people who currently work at Bethesda have to come up with ideas on their own, rather than coasting on the work of more creative people who either left long ago or never worked for them in the first place.
Man this makes me feel old. I've been a hard-core gamer since pong was new. As someone who's pretty much seen it all and worked in the industry I have to say this video is on point and you have a new subscriber.
Bethesda management and devs deserved *exactly* what they got. You can't constantly demand maximum payment for minimal effort and then cry about people demanding better for their money. Then there's the avid disdain the devs and management show to their customers. They *constantly* mistake gamers for "fans" that they are benevolently bestowing "favors" to... but we're not. Players are first and foremost *paying customers with rights and reasonable expectations* . We buy games with a reasonable expectation that when we pay a premium for a *product* that product will be complete, made with care, and be as described by the marketing/advertising. I can't remember when they last delivered on any of that, yet they *constantly* treat their customer base like spoiled children crying because we didn't get a second cookie with our milk. I mean look what they said when customers paid hundreds for the special ed of the last fallout game and got shit products in the kit! As far as I'm concerned, they're worse than EA/Bioware and I'll probably never purchase another game of theirs. There are better games at more reasonable prices from studios that respect their customers and treat their staff well. Why would I buy from studios like Bethesda anymore?
Ancient gamer here (50) But liked this video. I appreciate you pointing out what an older generation thought of Fallout 1 and 2 and how we see the newer content. I fit pretty much into that category even though I played thousands of hours of Fallout 3 and 4. Fallout 1 and 2 are light years better in the areas that make these games fun. (lore, story, immersion, replayability)
Haha absolutely buddy! I’m glad you enjoyed! And yeah, reality is gaming is generational. Fallout’s 1 and 2 weren’t exactly Coca-Cola sized conglomerates at their release, but they meant an awful lot to gamers back when they initially dropped. So imagining what it would feel like to grow up playing these games, hearing a big company bought them up, and changed the lore, the direction, the core concepts and more…and getting praise for doing so…I really do get how people would hate Bethesda on that level too. When the ecosystem of ideas say: “Bethesda is bad, they release bad games”, you have to ask how much of that was simply earned overtime. I super appreciate your comment btw dude, thanks for giving my video a shot :)
You should really give New Vegas a shot. NV is on a whole other level, and it has a mind blowing, ridiculously high number of ways stories can play out. You can side with the freaking raider hordes for crying out loud.
The character progression in Fallout 1 and 2 was my favorite part. Finding your first gun in a locker. The first time your melee or heavy weapons skills were high enough to just shred your enemy into literal pieces. That and Random Encounters while Fast traveling across the map. Starfield could have done this to break up the mundane fast travel.
@@arkyUS_YT They took Chess, made it into Checkers, but still called it Chess. It was cheaper for them to make Checkers, but they made more money selling Chess. It's plain and simple deception and that's why people were mad.
BTW Blizzard did the same thing, they took beloved games, dumbed them down and simplified them so that the drooling masses could finally enjoy them too despite being barely smart enough to plug in a light bulb and then corrupt it all by turning it into a business first and foremost, that is instead of quality, depth and individual talent, money went into commercials and monetization tricks.
If you are buying the game with the mindset of “mod will fix it” or “mods will make the game better”, you are the problem. Bethesda should be held accountable rather than expecting modders to fix/improve their game.
I wish Fallout 4 took more notes from New Vegas, 3 was my first and favorite game in the series, then my 2nd favorite New Vegas which expanded upon 3 but multiplied the RPG elements to allow lots of choices, So yeah i am disappointed that Fallout 4 went the opposite direction and made it a looter shooter with LIGHT RPG elements rather than being an RPG with heavy shooter elements. (they also killed my favorite version of the brotherhood of steel, which yes Fallout 3's Brotherhood was controversial but it was my favorite version, fuck Arthur Maxson) I also wish New Vegas got an extra 6 months of Dev time to help patch the bugs and make it more stable. I do miss the Spellcrafting that Morrowind and Oblivion had, i hate that Skyrim straight up removed it, Magic is the weakest form of combat in Skyrim and it makes Bretons and magic based Races feel underwhelming. Also fuck the horse Armor DLC, fucking Bethesda brought it back for Fallout 4 because "lol remember this?" Yeah fuck you Todd... -_- I saw one youtuber with the title "Starfield is just another Bethesda game, and that's ok" No it's not ok, first off it's wrong because it has less RPG elements than Fallout 4, and it doubles down on using the same Engine since 2002, yes it's modified, yes it's been updated, I wouldn't have a problem with the engine if Bethesda did more than just "good enough" upgrades, and actually overhaul it to the point where it feels like a completely different engine, So yes, if Bethesda put in the effort to fix all these legacy issues that have existed for so many years, they could keep the Gamebryo/Creation Engine which modders are familiar with. Speaking of... What is with the "you're not allowed to criticize Starfield or you're a hater" crowd... Guess we aren't allowed to be disappointed in Bethesda, we have to just blindly like everything they make, and be excited for the next game which will have even less RPG elements, lower quality writing, and more Radiant Quests that offer pathetic rewards. And the load screens problem, yeah "oh just put it on an SSD" That will make load times faster, but it doesnt change the fact that load screens are still there, You basically need to do like 4 RAID 0 PCIe4 SSDs to theoretically remove load screens because bethesda borked the caching systems that the engine had. I wish Bethesda could look back at their older games and bring back what has been missing and make their newer games feel like RPGs again.
Worst part is they did take more notes from New Vegas. The faction conflict in Fallout 4 was Bethesda's pathetic attempt to copy the faction dynamics in New Vegas without understanding why it was so good in New Vegas. Bethesda's just so out of touch that it doesn't matter who they take notes from, they won't be able to understand any of it anyways.
@@DanielJensBYeah... I do have my gripes with how they did the Brotherhood, but all of the factions have other issues too... One being the ending, The Nuke option is the ONLY option, so when they claim there are 4 endings, it's technically 2, blow up the institute, or blow everyone else up (except the minutemen)
I’ve been kinda curious about 76 nowadays tbh, since it’s had so much content added in, but I just think the game as a whole feels so damn unstable all the time. I liked 4 when it first came out, but agreed it was a major regression in depth gameplay wise. I wish they’d focus more on making their games into deeper RPGs, and less on marketing fluff and bs. Thanks for the comment btw dude!
@@arkyUS_YT no worries brother. I originally thought fallout 4 was going to be like the original games or nv/3, before it came out. I would search for info everywhere before it was announced. I saw the trailer and just knew. I eventually migrated to other games or just play oldies now. I don’t think it’s coming back.
@@ToastyChud The sheer amount of cash FO4 brought in for them does bum me out, because it makes sense they’d continue to focus on what they seem to be focused on…mass appeal. And that’s fine, but it makes their game so shallow as a result. And that sucks having grown up with them :/ I’ve heard people say it’s fun as a looter shooter, but even with that mindset…I just end up wanting to play a different game, set in the Fallout world in my head. Hopefully Obsidian gets its shot one day to make NV2 now that Xbox owns them both. Fingers crossed! 🤞
@@arkyUS_YT that would be amazing man, but like you said, beth is happy to keep their cash-cow going. Even though the games are objectively bad as long as they sell they will continue to release shoddy projects. A lot of this probably comes down to people on reddit who defend the games no matter what & enable this cycle. Gamers themselves are usually pushovers that will buy anything for the titles. And the fact that Beth cut obsidians bonuses & I’ve heard Todd say it’s not on the table. The craftsmanship & love that went into fallout 1, 2 3 & NV is unmatched. Something that could only come out of a small studio that works day & night for their passion project. As sad as it is, I don think it will ever happen. Beth cheapened the fallout name & now the new generation is oblivious to what it once was. And I agree what you said about 4. Fallout 3 at least was dark and believable in terms of lore and atmosphere, but the art designer who created it -Adam, died. Fallout 4 is goofy, the buildings look like playhouses(generic, repetitive) the factions are ludicrous, characters dull, brotherhood a shell of what it was supposed etc etc. if they can’t do the bare minimum I don have any hope left. But I will never forget what fallout did for me & it will always hold a special place in my heart. Thanks for the video friend. I’d appreciate more on this topic as in my opinion it can’t be stressed enough. Hopefully years down the line another studio will get a chance.
Bro... What you said about Fallout 4 is _exactly_ how I went about it too. "I saw the trailer and just knew." Being a massive FO3/FNV fan, FO4 was just a proper kick in the guts. Lol, almost a decade on and I'm still kinda salty about it.
3:51 to prove your point of how rare it is, that example of Cyberpunk 2077 isn’t even an IP they created, it’s an IP that has existed since the late 80s called Cyberpunk 2020.
19:45 is where this guy finally confesses that this video is 70% about himself and his feelings about games, 25% about Bethesda, 5% about Microsoft and 0% actually about Starfield. Oh but he does ask you to keep an eye out for his "real" Starfield video.
I used to play the demo disk games, remember a few as you do when recalling chindhood memories, it was something special and hard to put into words yet the culture or vibe of early 2000s for games and gamers felt tight.
I built my first gaming computer in 1998 but I never heard of Fallout until FO3 came out. I love the setting and it's just a coincidence that I went to elementary school basically exactly where Vault 101 was located.
I was shocked to see you only have a little over 3K subs. This video is really well done. Keep it up. I am sure this channel will grow. This was a very good video. You can tell you did your research. Also I will never forget horse armor. I remember when that happened and my friends and I laughed and said "no one is dumb enough to buy stuff like that in a video game." Boy were we wrong.......
As someone who genuinely enjoys playing Starfield, this video is comprehensive and its easy to both see and hear that you are an actual Bethesda fan. and seeing and hearing this from a different perspective has been very interesting.
That was an overly drawn out discussion about no much. Bethesda are a huge game studio with a CEO who’s primary focus is earning money and is not concerned about the game being fun.
This popped up on my recommended, seen the low view count and was going to skip, but I decided to go against that judgement. So happy I did! Awesome video, I’ve subbed, looking forward to more fontent
Tex! Thanks so much for giving it a shot dude! I’m definitely trying to get my own little foothold going, so I majorly appreciate you giving my video a spin and enjoying what you saw! Hope your new year has been well so far :)
>10k hrs in Skyrim since 2018 after my WoW addiction was broken, Starfield 1.3k hours between launch & early Jan when I finally decided to try BG3 (hilariously I bought it during development but held off since I was an old school D&D nerd and wanted to experience it complete), and BG3 I'm at 300 hrs in a month (and hilariously I haven't even left act 1 yet). I didn't have any hopes for Starfield (I'm normally not into sci, mostly fantasy). Honestly, I liked the idea of what they did with NG+ but there were just too many shortcuts taken. I ran to NG+13 to see all the different universes and it felt shallow after I 100%'d NG+13 to see what differences there were in quests as a Dragon *cough* I mean Starborn. It had potential and I don't regret my purchase but with all the reused content on generated planets/locations really hurt because I was hoping for their historical environmental story telling. Ok, I'm done rambling.
God the new game plus idea might be the single best concept they’ve put down in god knows how long now lmao But that alone can’t fully carry a game for you. I do hope, for the sake of fans who really adore digging into their games and living in them, that modders can enhance and provide diversity of experience for the game, because it is a cool template of a game, that’s missing heart, depth, detail, and all the traits everyone once fell in love with BGS for when they played their first BGS game. Thanks for the comment btw, I’m a super small channel so any and all feedback, comments, and perspectives are so very helpful!
@@arkyUS_YT agreed. The NG+ was where the game truly could shine, but again, it felt like they didn’t put a lot of effort into it as I redid all the factions, most quests, etc. There’s a hand full of times it felt like it mattered but mostly it just turned into a dialogue choice to skip other dialogue. I mean, how cool would it have been if while you’re out discovering things about the Unity & Starborn, if all the sudden Sarah turned to you and realized what you were, even if you were “pretending” to be normal? It was a truly amazing idea, but it didn’t feel like they did much with it. I’ve been taking a break from SF and playing BG3 finally and I’m enjoying that, but I’m curious in a few months if BSG can make some great things happen… I’m pretty active in the Skyrim modding community and from what I’ve seen, most of the modders that considered moving on (kind of like after SSE came out) have basically abandoned the idea, which is really sad because if anything all that wasted randomly generated content space could use is mods to add variations of POI’s, new suits/weapons, etc
I remember playing fallout 3 for the first time as my introduction to fallout and instantly becoming a fan of the franchise and by extension bethesda. In the 15 years since I have come to hate bethesda and what they have done to my precious fallout.
The paradox of Bethesda is that a terrible studio that has been making terrible games for the last 20 years is being extolled as some creators of “great games”. The only good game they have anything to do with is New Vegas. And that game wasn't made by Bethesda.
God it’s hard to argue against either of those, even if I’m impartial to Portal 2, but I suppose if you weren’t a fan of the humor, I could see Portal 1 being preferable. Thanks for the comment btw! :)
The very idea of a "perfect game" is... candid to say the least. These are cultural products. Like music songs/albums, paintings, sculptures, movies... the main difference being that games are interactive. What you consider "a perfect work of art" might very well be trash to the next person, and vice versa. There exists no objective and definitive way of measuring them through every lens.
@@simonak9699 idk, some things just accomplish what they intend to do differently Like the game of chess, I don’t think it can be improved upon It’s a happy accident like a deck of cards
@@channelbuckybronson1993 Exactly! There can be art on a chess board or deck of cards, but it doesn't change or even affect the fundamentals of the gameplay itself.
Damn. Rather than sucking the balls of off Bethesda's past and reliving the old glory days, you should really just focus on the present and just look at how bad Starfield is. It doesn't take 5 hours into the game to know that the game is terrible, and so are the minds in charge at Bethesda. Hell, an echo chamber spouting truths is still spouting out truths, especially if they're all saying Starfield sucks and they explain and prove their points.
What I most liked about Starfield discourse was that almost every video criticising it found new problems, that others didn't talk about. It's just so fundamentally disjointed, that you can take it apart for hours and still not get to the bottom of it.
This was incredibly well done. You managed to hit a lot of important topics that are relevant to not only this topic, and are prevalent in every part of culture today, with brevity while keeping everything tight and cohesive. I couldn’t do that. Fantastic video essay all around. I think you got to the heart of a lot of things that affect the perception of the company and this game specifically. I got like 20 hours out of this game somehow. I really tried, but I just couldn’t be bothered to keep going unfortunately. I wouldn’t say I’m a “Bethesda fan”, but I’ve enjoyed a decent amount of their previous stuff. Maybe that’s the same thing, I don’t know. I just mean to say I don’t care about the company. But this made me think about them in ways I haven’t previously which I appreciate. I do hope modders do some awesome things with this though. It makes me question if I actually like the games I thought I did since I mod the crap out of them now.
Morrowind. I bought my first PC and a 21" CRT specifically to play it, and it was the only game I played for YEARS. Between Tribunal, Bloodmoon, endless output by the modding community and my own custom mods, it never got old. I was so deeply immersed in the world that for a decade afterwards I had vivid memories of my explorations. Not memories of [i]playing[/i] it, mind you. No, they felt exactly like the memories of things I have physically experienced. I loved Skyrim (with fast travel turned off), but Morrowind . . . Morrowind was a masterpiece.
I've never seen a publisher known for single player rpgs so desperate to squeeze their fans for money Their business model is ridiculously insulting especially when they're competing with titans like Elden Ring & Cuberpunk just in recent years
Bethesda games formulae peaked in 2007 with Oblivion, which was a step up, bar a few places, on Morrowind. Skyrim has a smaller map and significantly less content. A comparison: The Fighters guild in Oblivion has 20 quests for completion of that story arc. The companions have 13, 4 of which are radiant quests rather than hand crafted. The Mages guild also has 20 questions, as opposed to the College having 18, with three of being optional. TES games in terms of graphics, environments and character models peaked in 2002. Compare Oblivion with COD 4 or Skyrim to Batman: Arkham City, just two like-for-like examples in the same year. BGS have been lazy for a long time, Starfield was simply where they got found out.
As one of the dinosaurs who grew up playing Morrowind, I lost my faith in Bethesda with Oblivion, of all games. I could not look past the lack of Almsivi Intervention and the game made it impossible to strip a location clean, as fast travel option did not work while overencumbered. This was a deal breaker for me. Besides, I put all my valuables and unique items into one chest, in my office as Archmage and the bloody game reset the contents... Skyrim felt like walking around one and the same dungeon over and over, killing the same enemies over and over. Hell, even named enemies respawned. Left with a feeling that I did not make the Skyrim world any better. Useless, disposable. Pay pig, basically. No more Elder Scrolls for me, thanks.
I actually like Skyrim's leveling system where you level up skills by using them more. It makes more sense, and the main reason why we don't do that around a tabletop is because it would be a nightmare to keep track of. This is a video game, where they can automate all the math. So why not?
The saddest thing, is there is good in the game, and it’s mainly in the little side stuff made by hand. I randomly came across a friendly ship with an older lady who was just named “grandma.” She talks about her husband passing, promoting her to fly around space RV style to keep herself busy.
Where’s the Starfield review?
In the pipeline at some point!
Truthfully, i didn’t want to make the video without having the context of the mod toolset being out, and based on the reception Starfield ended up receiving, i figure the upcoming DLC might be a bigger deal to the overall game feel than just more story stuff.
TLDR: I wanted to judge the game WITH creation kit mods out, and now i’m curious to return to the game once the upcoming DLC drops since it could be hefty to the base game (if bethesdas smart it will be, anyway)
@@arkyUS_YTYeah, shattered space with over 50 new poi's on one planet (don't worry they will all still be identical copy pastes, so you'll know where to look for gear 😉)
the best argument against Starfield is realizing you can't heal on your ship's own medbay
Wait what….🙁
Yeah but you can't say anything bad about the game until you play it for 70+ hours. Then you'll know how terrible the writing actually is.
Or that you can't flip upside down in "zero G."
Or that there's ship modules with jail cells built into them and there's even a variety of non-lethal weapons to knock down enemies but you can't take anyone hostage and send them to those jail cells, heck all "Eliminate X criminal" quests DEMAND that you kill the target because incapacitating them won't count.
But hey, the modding community has already made functional brigs as a mod.
Nah that’s just oversight it’s that the game fucking sucks
Bethesda: we love modders! As a reward, here's another fucking update to games a decade or more old. Have fun fixing and updating.
Yea they should really...REAALLYYY consider to stop updating after, say, year 2~3... It's not a live service game. It doesn't need constant updates. Especially because modders already did bug fixes and the like WAY better with the unofficial patch. Just let the modders finally rest already. Stop forcing them to update their mods for 10+ years...
Don't forget "we chose mods for you that you can't uninstall if you didnt want them. you're welcome!"
@@SirTayluhYeah but why wouldn’t you want new power armor?
@supesmin446 I was thinking of Skyrim, actually. Although I'm sure the power armor is nice. I like choosing my own mods. As long as they went "we are giving you some mods, but select and install them at your own leisure", id be fine. Having some corpo go "we want to do some good pr. Here's some mods we are installing for you. You cannot get rid of them if you didn't want them. I'm out, no questions"
@Mikehoncho1050 I played Skyrim vanilla for over 1000 hours before I got into modding. Skyrim was a revelation at the time, and I don't knock anyone who plays it in that state still. But millions of players do mod or created mods for Skyrim. When that game updates, every mod dependent on SKSE breaks until teams update/fix them, which can take weeks or months. But why even bother updating this game that came out in 2011, when those dev teams could be working on the newest title to improve now and faster? Fallout I get because of the TV show. And I don't hate Bethesda; I recognize that every decision they make is in the name of profit, like every other gaming company.
Horse armor was the original sin, only god knows why bethesda is still kicking
People forget about paid mods
And how they tried to shift the blame for that to Valve...shortly after they did the Creation Club with never-ending updates that break non-CC mods
Including say...a shitty CC update after years of not touching Fallout 4 just before the release of Fallout London
@@commisaryarreck3974 "just before the release of Fallout London" wow that really sounds like Bethesda wanted to cripple the greatest unofficial expansion out of the fear that it would outshine Fallout 76. Oh wait, it outshone 76 in like the first couple days of its release despite Bethesda's best efforts XD
Its just really frickin cool to me when a modding team who loves the franchise partners up with a big-name game platform like GOG to make it happen near seamlessly. They love the series and they love the setting so much they even included the Warhammer model shop in Bromley
$20 for armour in Halo, stop crying
They completely fucked the exploration. Nothing else really matters. The fact that I found the same set of datapads 5 times in 1 day on 4 different planets will tell you all you need to know.
It really is a bummer, because since DAY ONE, the strongest thing Bethesda has been at is exploration and environmental detail.
Why they decided to try and automate their literal bread and butter, is beyond me. Maybe they felt scale would impress people, but it really hasn’t, and I think that’s shown in spades with a ton of negative reactions to the game as a whole.
Also! Thanks for the comment homie!
@@arkyUS_YT The thing is.. you really can't do space without scale. They gave us the scale, but they put nothing in it. That's really what the issue is.
I can never appreciate Howard since Fallout 76, I knew he was full of shit with Starfield.
@@arkyUS_YT You said: "...Starfield is a really good bethesda game". That`s not true. The lore makes no sense and nearly all quests are immersion-breaking, dumb, simplified, grind. They took many aspects of previous games and implemented them poorly, so we ended up with a version that does everything it can to disappoint.
Dragonboren -> Starborn,
Shouts with cool dungeons and bosses to discover -> Just point the player to a temple that is every time the same with nothing of substance,
Oh you are the dragonborn? Can you help me with that dangerous thing, because you are really powerful? -> Hey random person! Please talk to dangerous people because I trust a stranger more than myself,
You can build your house to store all cool unique stuff? -> You can build an outpost that is super annoying to manage and grindy to build and is destroyed after finishing the main quest
Cool Interactivity and beliefable npcs with shedules etc. -> I am a doll that is supposted to be here, so I can ask you for random favors
Started singing midway through this comment
"Minimal Contractual Obligation" is the phrase you are looking for. You see, when you own your own company, got investors and become CEO you have a major problem, a problem that comes with success: you cannot retire without tanking your own stock. When a company is recognized for having a "winning team", you cannot break up that team without investors reacting. So as the meme implies the only way the senior management can retire and keep their stock option value is to be bought out. That's right, after 30+ years the senior management were ready to retire, and who was walking down the block looking for something new for Game Pass?
After 30+years in Bethesda and 7yrs going nowhere with the game, with Microsoft funding a year's deadline, with RETIREMENT within sight, the management at Bethesda provided the Minimal Contractual Obligation", they produced the legal definition of a "game" and then retired, cashing out their stock options, the moment the game released and cleared Microsoft's legal department. Go check, everyone retired one week after the game came out. "Bethesda" isn't there anymore, Todd Howard is no longer a CEO but a Microsoft employee, and I hope Microsoft fires his (censored).
I do feel some degree of “the bare minimum” when it’s come to Bethesda since Fallout 4. It bums me out because I think everyone wants a full fledged, depth focused game from them again, but when popular gameplay loops require less effort (looter shooter style, repetitious post game grinding etc) I suspect they’re seeing it as the path of least resistance, and the most optimal path into a certain subsection of game fans hearts.
Thanks for the comment btw dude!
Leave Todd's Leather Jacket-wearing lies out of this!
any sources to back these claims? can't find anything that confirms this on any of the financial websites, so I'm just wondering how you even came across this information without just making it up. There isn't any entries for Howard on Finviz regarding sales of MSFT, ZeniMax and BGS aren't even publicly listed stock tickers, nothing on InsiderScreener.. even searching for 'todd howard share sale' brings zero results. sooo if you can't back this up I'm calling BS. And *as much as I would love this dystopic turn of events* for BGS, so far there's no evidence for it therefore I don't buy it.
And to the other point, Howard never was "CEO" of BGS. He was only the EP, Robert Altman was the "CEO" of ZeniMax.. One thing that is interesting though, MSFT waited until Altman was dead and gone before acquiring ZeniMax. But because these were privately-held companies, they didn't have to follow reporting that publicly-held companies need to be upheld to. So who knows _who_ the actual CEO of BGS was.
Todd Howard is a Gloryhole champion
This explains alot, ES 1,2,3,4 are the original creators legacy as much as we want more from them they gave us endless ours of entertainment now its time for them to enjoy their lives.
Easiest way to distinguish between a "hater" and a disappointed long-time Bethesda fan? A hater says "Lol it's just Skyrim/Fallout in space." But a disappointed fan, like me, I say, "I WISH it was Skyrim/Fallout in space."
Oh man. If only...
Ironically they both say the same damn thing
@@Doyoueverwonderwhywerehere u wot m8?
If only starfield wasn’t loading screen simulator with the same six structures reused over and over. It felt like all the worst parts of past Bethesda games
is a hater someone that puts cloth on someones head?
Bethesda is so complacent. They stopped trying because they didn’t feel like they had to innovate. People buying Skyrim five times sure doesn’t help. Stop it people!
Bethesda is like allah
This.
@@havefuntazarasu5367 Elaborate
I'm genuinely not sure why anyone would buy the game five times. I purchased it once, for PC, and picked up the DLCs as they launched. I received the Special Edition upgrade for free as a result, and have never once had to buy it again.
The problem is they tried to innovate too much when all we want is for them to return to their roots
Fo4 build system being dogwater, fo76 build system somehow being worse, fo4 vats being drastically changed, fo76 being a multi-player disaster, all bad decisions. If the build system was good and if the multi-player was good, it would've likely been okay, but they tried to innovate and failed. They tried with starfield aswell and again, failed to innovate
Bethesda makes rpgs for people who don't like rpgs
Seemingly so actually! Which is a bummer, because if they keep adding depth the way the die hard want them to, I suspect they’d hook more people.
I mean Balders Gate was the biggest game last year, I think we can stop babying general casual audiences!
Also thanks for the comment lad, I’m a small channel so it’s super appreciated ^^
@@arkyUS_YT
Baldur's Gate, mate.
it is just the most popular game of this decade... easy to get it wrong.
@@acetrigger1337 Brother, I’m running a non-stop subathon on my twitch, and have been live for 20 days. I respond to these comments between me sleeping, please excuse me for my single misspelling of Baldur’s Gate, a word my phone informs me is spelt wrong as it is, on a single thread.
@@acetrigger1337
No one likes a spitefully petty pedant
This is unfair. What would be fair would be to say that BGS has made RPGs for people who didn't realize they liked RPGs. Plenty of people have gone from Skyrim into the RPG depths.
I warned my best friend about Starfield but he pre-ordered it. I couldn't save him.
Yup. Unfortunately. He had to figure out the hard way.
@@rzwitdauncut nah, he doesn't learn, I told him not to buy Battlefield V at launch, yet he did anyway.
Serves him right, tbh. I know it’s mean to say, but the no. 1 rule is to NEVER pre-order a game. No Man’s Sky, Cyberpunk 2077, Starfield and so on… nothing guarantees you that the game will be any good once it releases, and you risk ruining the experience for yourself if the game is a buggy mess/unfinished. It took approximately 5/6 years for NMS to become great, and now I absolutely recommend it to anyone, Cyberpunk took a little more than a year, and now without the bugs it’s amazing. Pre-ordering is a big nono
your friend sounds extremely replaceable
Honestly? No.
The reason people modded Elder Scrolls was because THEY LIKED THE UNIVERSE since morrowind
The reason people modded Fallout was because THEY LIKED THE UNIVERSE
Starfield's universe is the blandest piece of storytelling i've ever seen. Instead of inspiring - it actually just draws a blank for my creativity.
As someone who worked on Nehrim, the sequel mod in Skyrim - i can say that i won't be touching Starfield with a 10 foot pole.
90% of mods for 4 were to overhaul base game mechanics because they were so dogshit or titties, what are you on about. 4 was a mess from the ground up lmao
Its the same logic why people write fanfics. The original IP was interesting and full of potential to create more stories. Encouraging viewers to write their own stories set within that IP.
But if the IP is a just a bland corporate cookie-cutter amalgamation of milquetoast sci-fi tropes then no one is going to be interested in making stories with it.
I simply disagree. If you look at the changes in game design from morrowind on you'll notice a pattern. I knew fallout76 was inevitable. It was the culmination of every single decision made since morrowind. Starfield was their attempt to bring people back, but far too late as at this point they dont know what makes their games good. They probably believed, like cdpr, bioware, and other studios, that because theyre bethesda it'll just work out. Bethesda has taken a hammer to every single good thing they've had, including mods (with their insistence on forcing paid mods) and blame for their current situation rests entirely on their lack of imagination, inability to change, refusal to learn or take responsibility, and their greed.
I’m confused! Because wherein you disagree with me, I agree with you! Haha
I do think every game has slowly but surely backed away from depth of mechanics and user impact. I even agree that Starfield brought back some of those features and ideas themselves, in order to reappeal to past fans, but like you said, they’d burned so many bridges in so many different ways, from generation to generation, franchise to franchise, and person to person, that nobody gave them the benefit of the doubt.
I’m pretty sure we agree, but maybe I’m misunderstanding!
Also thanks for the comment dude, I’m a small channel so it helps that you gave my video a chance, and wanted to share your own perspective too ^^
@@arkyUS_YT Maybe I misinterpreted the "and it starts with a capital X" part. Your channel is great and your humor is on point, I'll like and comment every chance I get 👍
@@IzzmonsterOh dude you’re so sweet! The Capital *S* actually is in reference to the Xbox Series S.
My conspiracy theory is, Starfield has so many loading screens, and broken up content, because they were made to ensure it ran perfectly and similarity on Series S as it would on PC and X.
Because modders have seemingly removed the loading screens, and for the exception of a little pop in while it loads, the game seems to do surprisingly well without loading screens!
But with the Series S being less powerful and fast, I theorize they had to make the S look similar to the Series X, so they introduced the loading screens.
Just my conspiracy is all ;p
@arkyUS_YT Ah! I see, very interesting I didn't know they were able to do that. Last I heard some modders were abandoning starfield so I'm glad to see it won't die out completely.
I’ve never enjoyed a Bethesda game and have them 1 last chance with Starfield…. 2/10 game and it’s by far the worst AAA major release I’ve played in sometime.
The first problem with bethesda was when they created Morrowind, they relased an outstadning game (my favourite out of their games) but it was buggy and had problems rooted in incompetent engine usage. The lesson they learned was that they can make undercooked games and still be successful. And it resulted in them making every next game less and less polished. Up to Fallout 4, it was still working, though sympthoms were clearly visibile.
One of Bethesda's mistakes was to make Emil Pagliarulo as a lead writer.
I can't believe he kept that position after Fallout 4
@@BlackTestament7hard to get rid of someone who regularly plays golf with the boss.
@@ericpear4205 True, can't argue with that lol
would be nice if we ACTUALLY KNEW THE PROBLEM.
you can be a good writer with game-compatible story that can get quashed en masse by gameplay limitations discovered after the work is already done.
@@gabbonoo Stop being dense, there are tons of story related issues in every bethesda games since Fallout 3.
They lost Michael Kirkbride and gained Emil Pagliarulo, that was never gonna end well.
Really all the talented people who made the BGS games we liked have left. BGS is never going to give you that next Morrowind or Oblivion. Just like how modern Obsidian will never give us FNV 2 because all most of people who made that game left long ago.
We as gamers should focus our energy on finding the next great thing rather than wasting our time and money on companies that have long lost their mojo.
Kirkbride may be wacky, but people like him are what made the best elder scrolls and other Bethesda intellectual property stories the best ( and Skyrim and Fallout 4 have been carried by modders for most of the time they have been out)
edit: fixed spelling error, i had "madders" but meant "modders"
@@unclerukmer Obsidian is being stopped from making good games, dont insult them
@@cymikgaming1266 Outer Worlds was utter shit. Whose fault was that?
@@unclerukmer i still like it
So yeah, I'm fucking terrified of TES VI.
Skyrim is an eternal game, a legendary title that will still be revered in 10+ years, I'm sure of it. Some people launched careers out of modding the game, thousands like myself feel as if Skyrim is our home from home and millions of hours have been poured into it collectively. It's a pillar of gaming culture if you're into modding and Bethesda's Magnum Opus.
TES VI isn't gonna be any of that. If FO76 and Starfield are any indications, Bethesda is done, relegated to churning out soulless cashgrabs that break promises and their audience's heart.
Sad story, really.
Bethesda is the toxic boyfriend who keeps saying he’ll change, but we both know he won’t. And for some reason, we keep pretending that one vacation he took us on is still worth the last 12 years of hell.
but it was a really good vacation wasn’t it 😓
@@MysteriousPear802This mindset will hurt you badly.
@@TheOrbPonderer-7 onika burgers
You weren't his only GF. He was spinning plates
@@MysteriousPear802 it would have been, if he had taken a moment to appreciate the moment we were in, rather than looking at the past or the future the whole time.
I think nakeyjakey said it best- the game design was outdated *10 years ago*
Robeless Jacob do be indeed dropping bombs on us mortals.
Thanks for the comment btw ^^
YogaBallGamer do be spitting
That's the problem with games too long in development,Duke Nukem Forever had the same problem
@@kay94The whole “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mindset is the exact reason why the gaming industry is going downhill. It’s a lame excuse at ignoring innovation that should’ve been there. It’s obvious you’re a fanboy.
@@kay94 "It's game design has only slightly improved since the original dark souls."
Demons souls, you *should* say. But its changed significantly- in terms of how its developed its been optimized and expanded, where as I would call bethesdas streamlined to the point of constriction. Dont underestimate how much even just simply being able to jump freely changes gameplay and combat options. Bethesda is still thinking in "point gun + shoot" levels of gameplay. Maybe some crafting but even thats not nearly as elaborate as it used to be
Perhaps Jakey was glib but he wasnt wrong. the need to innovate has been a strike against bethesda since as early as oblivion where people were already complaining the mechanics had become too streamlined. Fallout 4 hit a fever pitch
They just can’t keep up when we have games like elden ring and baldurs gate, it isn’t 2010 anymore
Played Elden Ring & I'm absolutely unable to go back to the lame gameplay/design that comes with all Bethesda games. Melee mechanics still working like back in Skyrim, madness.
@@nokiae51yangu for real. I don’t think souls combat would translate to elder scrolls, but other rpg’s have done first person sword-play leagues above Bethesda. Kingdom come deliverance has a fantastic first person medieval combat system
@@girth_goblin elden ring's my 1st souls game, & now I want to go delve deep into the entire catalogue.
Been looking forward to playing that & baldurs gate 3.
After I'm done with elden ring (several hundred hours).
These guys & ubisoft don't stand a chance... & All these other games passing cutscenes for gameplay
@@nokiae51yangu you totally should, they’re fantastic games. I recommend dark souls 3. The combat, the lore, the difficulty; it’s all perfect. Dark souls 1 is also an absolute masterpiece though
@@alexwalters35 I disagree. The polish of those games is absolutely something that Bethesda could accomplish - they just don’t. Look at baldurs gate and Elden ring. Every nook and cranny is masterfully sculpted. Animations are impactful, levels and encounters are thoughtfully designed, and the voice acting is impeccable. All of these things come together to create a world that feels real. Bethesda games have none of that. I genuinely believe Todd thinks “big space to explore = good game”, because every other element is lazy. Bethesda is terrified to let the player have an impact on the game world. Animations and gunplay are weightless, voice acting is garbage, and interesting quests are non-existent. Hell, they couldn’t even bother to create explosion animations for the in-game water. It’s lazy, boring, and sterilized. Todd could learn from baldurs gate and Elden ring, but he’s only interested in dumbing down the one revolutionary game he’s ever created: morrowind.
Your final statement i cant agree with. Starfield is a typical Bethesda game, yet their worst one to date. All the weaknesses are excarberated, all the strengths shrunked to the absolute minimum, the few improvements to be expected not worth the effort to name them.
NMS has a lot to do and a lot of freedom in how you do it, but is very much so a game where you make your own goals with what you want to accomplish. It's far from perfect but the love the devs have put into continuously updating the game keeps me coming back every update or so for a while to check out what new stuff has been added (pirate dreadnought battles are pretty fun).
Doesn't hurt to add that they literally added free VR support instead of having to buy a whole separate version of the same game unlike bethesda....@DorisDay-lw4xs
@DorisDay-lw4xs It is much better, but not a different game than Starfield. NMS is much more a survival type game than an RPG.
@DorisDay-lw4xs They added a lot but it's still boring and empty. It's really not this amazing game people portray it to be. If it's cheap then it's worth picking up but it ain't all that.
@DorisDay-lw4xs NMS is Minecraft in Space. Starfield is Fallout in Space (without the VATS). Other than the space part, they are very different games.
@DorisDay-lw4xs i honestly can't recommend NVM as a Starfield replacement.
it's a somewhat space sim, while Starfield is not a space sim, it's an RPG that happen to be in space.
they not even trying to compete with Space sim game, It's an RPG game, expect it to be played like an RPG game
also space sim is boring & somewhat repetitive if you're not used to it.
for me, No Man's Sky is boring, and i never had issue with exploration game like Minecraft,
NMS is just empty & repetitive.
Despite people trashing about Starfield, it's still a Stronger game that will constantly reward you within 50+ hours of your gameplay.
it's still a Bethesda game, the game shares 70% of its genetics from Skyrim and Fallout.
the RPG & Stats element of Starfield is just as good as Fallout 4.
everyone who played the game played it for 200+ hours, despite them criticizing the game hard.
so don't get fooled by the trash talker. it's still a good game
it just people hated Bethesda, because they made a bad decision in the past like Elder scroll online and Fallout 76,
which makes a lot of people very salty about Bethesda. they took a very respected game, and made a Mid online game out of it.
so, people used Starfield as a Punching bag.
Dog you had me until you said “starfield is a pretty good *bethesda game*” and while this may sound hyperbolic I genuinely think starfield is objectively their worse video game ever made. I’d literally rather play 76 because I can enjoy their jank and shit stories with a friend. Starfield…too long for me to point out why it’s their worse video game and I refuse to call it good.
76 remains the worst game ever made. It can not be overtaken int hat category. Starfield is just boring and utterly devoid of creativity.
@@thecocktailian2091 No it does not, it is worst launch there is no argument there, but it is far from a bad game right now. The story is not great but it is passable, most of the mechanics are working and are pretty fun, they added a ton of content, there is always something happening in the game, the community is amazing and content updates are fairly regular even if not big. The biggest problem with 76 right now in my opinion is late game content, there is not much of it. Also the game is not pay to win, it is pay to spend less time grinding materials but that’s fairly common in mmoarpgs
@@EdgyADudeit's still their worst release because they literally hyped and marketed it with lies and false advertising then refused to refund people. What they did with 76 is technically illegal in my country, but who's taking a dev to court over
@@Loctorak you don’t know how the game looks like late game don’t you? If you WANT to get all the best gear, you will have to grind no matter what. You don’t need that gear to play and you can do everything in the game maybe just a tad slower than fully optimized character. If you don’t want to grind for best gear it just changes the game from I don’t have to go out for resources to I need to spend like 3 hours a month to get some things that I’m low on. And most people won’t even do that because they will just look if they are low on something and gather it while doing other things or just buy it because money in that game does not have a lot of uses.
Objective is a subjective word.
The reason Bethesda games all feel like Bethesda games is because theyve been using the same goddamn engine for the last 74 years
Another one that doesnt know what an engine is lol.
@@joelhodoborgas Yeah, you.
@@Razumen No, u.
@@slizzardshroomer9666 Did you wipe your mouth when you left Todds office today?
Micro transactions really hurt the gaming world
Games are soulless now. Before microtransactions, game companies actually cared about creating something great, now its just all about the money
@@wyattgeorge9696 Game companies were after money way before microtransactions were a thing. This is a business.
- Even a small 5-person indie studio that pays each employee 40,000/year needs 200K yearly in salaries, plus fixed expenses (rent, licenses, hardware, bills, etc), meaning a 2 year project costs half a million before it even breaks even.
- Extrapolate that to 10 people, and you're a million down the drain in 2 years. 100 people? 10 million.
- And the above figures are for a TWO year project. So many titles take way more than that to hit the market.
... i don't think you realize how expensive making these cultural products really is.
@@simonak9699 I don't think you even know how any of it works kid
@@simonak9699 But I love laughing at a bootlicker who makes up crap to try hard and justify greed
@wyattgeorge9696 No, at the end of the day game studios and publishers are and always have been buisnesses. It's always been about the money.
The difference is that back in the day the thing that sold and turned a profit was good art. Games that genuinely innovated, and were enjoyable to play.
Now that consumers buy any unfinished, unoriginal, and uninspired garbage these companies try to sell them without a second thought, they have no reason to spend the time, money, and effort to actually make a decent game.
We as consumers and gamers vote with out dollar, and it is our, and only our falt that the gaming industry is in the state that it is.
Its time to take responsibility, to take a stand, and make the changes we want to see.
I mean we have:
- A near infinite pool of the same copy-pasted bs that feels machine generated.
- An RPG without a single good character
- A main story with zero stakes
- A multiverse hopping adventure where you can't make any radical changes or kill protected NPCs.
- A sci-fi where the writers think that the vacuum of space is some kind of cold substance.
Man, remember when console exclusive use to mean "big system selling games" and not "minimum effort they'll play it anyway"?
no, if ESO & Fallout 76 were never happened, people won't lash it out on Starfield.
it just the frustration finally blew up.
people nitpicking every single mistake on Starfield.
without ESO & Fallout 76, we probably will get Elder scroll 6, and Fallout 5 sooner, but it never happened because
they put all of their precious resources into a resources hungry online game.
Starfield is a good game, and it have a lot room for improvement
i had a lot of time in Starfield, from
- Capturing enemies ships,
- appreciating the Ship interior,
- Play as a crazy role like a debt collector or Corporate Hitman,
- go into a random industrial outpost and just having a great adventure looting around.
- building and connecting a multiple outpost
- Ship battle
- Weapon, spaceship, and other Mods, which they did a great job in this one
- Perks are also get a glow up from Fallout 4
- Massive Graphics boost, no more low res texture and Low poly assets, everything is high res, ray traced and believeable.
- Level design in starfield is Great, this is what i really love about Fallout 4 as well.
it took Elder scroll 5 game before reaching a Mainstream success,
and you expect starfield to do it in one single title?
how unreasonable can you be?
It's a new IP that have more potential to be a truly great game with couple of fix or in Starfield 2.
Why don't you work at bethesda first and see, all of that they do was "Minimum Effort" or not?
i bet you can't even create a single Character or even a single Spaceship.
you're not even stronger than the weakest Bethesda Dev, but you talk as if you're a big shot yourself
Did you play it?
@@TheParagonIsDead Yeah, beaten it and all the factions
@@jensenraylight8011 What are you talking about? No, actually what? Great level design? You sure loved flying through those hoops I guess. Or replaying the same "outpost" located and populated with bo rhyme or reason over and over again.
Weapon mods, what? Weapons don't improve with levels, why bother with mods if you're gonna pick up the same gun with better stats two levels drom now.
Space combat is so barebones it's nothing. Yeah, customise your ship to kill time and make another "Batwing in Starfield" tweet, but there's no reason. The only funny thing was that the same donut ship trick from Kingdom Hearts 2 seemed to work for some peope
And I don't need to "work at Bethesda" or "see you make a game" or whatever version of that tired old fallacy you prefer, because for an example of doing a decent job writing a world and characters I could point to their own games before they gave the fuck up trying.
Maybe you have tolerance levels adequate to enjoy nothing plots in static worlds of AI generated dungeons, but we use to have better from the same studio. They didn't sell it like an experimental new IP, they marketed it like "the next big thing from the creators of all those famous things".
And yes, I'm no Bethesda Dev, I'm the consumer. And this product was a fucking disappointment. They use to do better.
Damn, they didn't even do cities populated by NPCs, they just spawned dozens of "Citizens" going to the next door to despawn while most merchants and quest givers are nailed to their posts 24/7. Remember when NPCs had lives and schedules and relations? But sure anything that's not a glowing praise is a nitpick to some people, no matter how glaring the issue is in your space RPG where you don't know how fucking space works.
@@demilung good good, don't delete your comment,
let the whole world see how pathetic and unreasonable a man can be,
trying too hard to hate something
And also the cherry on top, the fact that you even beaten the game, meaning that it's actually a good game,
because if you actually hate it like how you describe it in your long ass essay that you wrote,
you won't played past the first 5 hours mark,
Your word was contradicting
I don't have any problem with people nitpicking stuff,
i had a problem with people nitpicking stuff but ignoring all the good stuff as if it wasn't exist, giving other people Biased opinion
I haven't played starfield, but if hundreds of thousands to millions of people say they got sick for weeks and shat their intestines out for eating something, I'm not going to eat that ok? I have played all their games before starfield, and the pattern was clearly going in this direction so I believe the complaints. Also, if they make a bad product I want them used to people not buying it. If people buy the bad stuff they make just to confirm it's trash, you'll just hear the typical "MORE COPIES SOLD THEN EVER!!!" bull
You misused the term "crux".
"Crux" means "the most difficult part of" or "the most vital part of", not a synonym for harsh criticism.
Remember that Bethesda didn't make the Vault Boy. It was the original Fallout creators who did that.
aka Obsidian
So the same developers that haven't really made anything amazing sing FO new vegas? lol
@@TitanSubZero15 play the outer worlds and then stfu
@@TitanSubZero15 Obsidian didn't
@@ryanabernathy4144 Obsidian has released several successful games since. It's not for nothing Microsoft elected to acquire them.
While I haven't actually played most of them (especially the more recent titles, due to being swamped with options!), I can personally attest that Pillars of Eternity and its sequel are pretty good games.
The weird sense of tribalism people get about video game companies is just bizarre. It really does highlight humanity's poo flinging roots.
What makes this hilarious is that modders rejected Starfield cause it was so boring
Also the issue if you listen to game designers is that the game itself is so flawed that it can't be fixed. For instance the load screens are inevitable because of the creation engine.
But its already the 11th most modded game ever even before CK
@@jfkst1 It isn't that the game itself has so many Bugs but that those Bugs aren't within the reach of Modders, so that they are litterally like a pimple that can't be popped if you know what i mean
oh yea, It’s biggest strength besides modability is that it’s really good with physical simulation of objects. Except it’s something that was rarely used.
And don’t forget the modding tools that promised. I thought you liked moders Bethesda! Where are the modding tools.
You're saying this while the game has a regularly active modding community on Nexus??
I'm sorry but there are very weird takes in this video, so I feel the need to make a critic of your critic:
1. Around the 24-minute mark you spend a long tangent on the modability of BGS games being one of the reasons for their instability. Not only this is objectively wrong (a lof of the bugs are due to simple coding mistakes (stats not acting as they should, quest flags, etc.)), but specifically in "Starfield"'s case the modding tools haven't been released yet and the modding community have come out and pointed out how "Starfield" is actually not mod-friendly. That's one of the main reasons why modders aren't interested in making mods for the game (that and general disinterest).
And their most bugged game "Fallout 76", is an online game, which naturally makes it a poor choice for modding (which is why it has very few mods).
Furthermore, most of the complaints for "Starfield" have nothing to do with the bugs. In fact, most of the critics seem to agree that Starfield is their most stable release so far.
2. Around the 16/17 minute mark you talk about players not playing the game and just regurgitating complaints they heard elsewhere...While showing Steam reviews. Which can't be posted unless you have bought the game, and clearly show the total playtime of the review: the first one having 6h, second 4h, third 6h, then nearly 10h and the last one seemingly around 4h.
Implying that those people who BOUGHT THE GAME, and played it for HOURS, might be arguing in bad faith and just regurgitating critics they've already heard for "social media standing capital". This is all right before saying "I'm not talking about people who played the games and faced issues". Which is it then? Are you implying that those people on Steam somehow pirated the system just to leave bad reviews? If those reviews aren't what you're supposedly talking about in that moment, why even show them here then? Wouldn't random YT comments or Reddit posts of people who clearly haven't played the game be a more appropriate way to illustrate that point?
It only feels like a poor attempt at undermining the validity of critics about Starfield.
3. The take on Fallout 3 is quite weird. You start out by saying that the complaints came later, before later acknowledging that fans of Fallout complained about the changes from day 1.
This is especially weird when there are numerous complaints about the game (especially the ending) from all the way back to 2008 and 2009 (I will remind you that it was released at the end of October). People didn't "change their minds" about F3, the complaints were always there.
4. The console exclusive point is just as baffling. Most critics literally do not care about console wars, especially now. People hate Starfield because they think it's a boring bland game full of loading screens, that's the main point I got across from all the various critics I've seen. The worst is that you acknowledge yourself that this is no longer relevant, yet kept the point in your video.
Again, it feels like a poor attempt at undermining the validity of critics about Starfield rather than adressing them (which you refuses to do, which is fine, but why poison the well then?).
5. Let me speak quickly about "Elden Ring". Yes I'm am writing that comment, after watching the video. The big difference between in the relationship between "Elden Ring" and "Dark Souls" ("Dark Souls 3" would be more fair for this comparison) versus "Oblivion" and "Skyrim", is that From Software built on the "Dark Souls" formula to create a game that not only correct issues it had (some stats being somewhat useless, a lack of liberty in how to tackle levels specifically in DkS 3, a seemingly undercooked story that rethreaded too much on familiar ground only to be saved by its much superior DLC storyline, weapon arts being a lackluster new addition (too weak to be worth the use), magic being nerfed into the ground especially miracles) but it also added new mechanics (Spirit Summons, horse riding, truly open world, jumping, night & day cycle, guard counter as well as crouching and stance breaking (even if those two are taken over from Sekiro, they weren't in Souls games)). On top of that, it's undeniably the Fromsoft "Souls-like" with the most content so far whether it's in terms of weapons, armor, bosses, magic, dungeons, etc.
And even on top of all of that, ER detractors did complain that the game is "just" "open-world Dark Souls". So ER isn't even the best example for your point here.
Meanwhile, Bethesda RPGs aren't simply "the same" as the previous ones. What's specifically being criticized (which you later talk about) is the "dumbing-down" of Bethesda games. After "Daggerfall", players expected "more". "Morrowind" was a somewhat weird response to that demand since while it was technically smaller than "Daggerfall", it had far more hand-crafted content than "Daggerfall"'s procedurally generated world and copy-pasted sprites. After that "Oblivion" had fewer skills than "Morrowind", less magic (which also meant fewer means of traversal), fewer weapon types, fewer factions, fewer equipment slots, etc. All on top of retconning previously established lore about Cyrodiil that fans were looking forward to (dragons, dragon riders, how various Daedric Planes are supposed to look, the jungle, the Colovian/Nibenay cultural split, the influence of war mages over Cyrodiil, the various cults of Cyrodiil, the architecture of the Imperial City itself, even down to the Imperials suddenly no longer having roman-inspired designs, etc.).
It got even worse with Skyrim straight up ditching Attributes and spellmaking altogether, not adding any new weapon type (except crossbows making a comeback in the Dawnguard DLC), having even fewer factions, retconning more of the lore, adding nonsensical lore, etc. All on top of not fixing already existing issues (boring combat, uninteresting storyline).
So yes while the take that "there is nothing necessarily wrong with sequels being similar to past games!" is absolutely true, in this context, it's very much a false equivalency. Because not only it's not the main issue, but even FromSoft has made more changes to its melee combat system than BGS did (guard counter, weapon arts, and posture-breaking).
With all that being said, I 100% agree with some of your other points and the idea that the current backlash is the result of a death by a thousand cuts.
Very constructive! You don't see many comments like this anymore. :)
Loved your comment. Agree completely.
The take in the video was a very romanticized sort of critique, peppered with lack of research on certain topics, especially on the programming side of the game, otherwise he, indeed, would have had no logical reason to ramble on about the modability of Starfield -- which is quasi-nonexistent, compared to previous releases.
I will critique the second point the hours played part doesn't really change the critique with the effect of reviews and our social nature being hijacked. yes they have played the game but how much of their experience was effected by the hoard of negativity around it. Did the traversal actually bother you the first 4 hours you played it or only after someone told them it should? I'm having this issue right now, having played it last year and moving on to coming back seeing the visceral reactions online and questioning myself, did I actually enjoy it? Am i allowed to enjoy it? Which I did to the point that went back to play it and still enjoy it, it's padded out and focused way to much on aspects that don't help the game but it's one of the best 7 out of 10 games ive played. But what of the mass audience of people whose opinions were soured by the online discorse. Their opinions altered to avoid being cast aside by the pack. To see These 2s and 3s out of 10's (which by the way I believe must be socially induced hyperbole for a game that at least turns on and provides a function as a competent shooter I can't see it below a 5, as they say being average is a death sentence) "oh I don't want to be wrong I should bring the game down a bit" we are social creatures we dont want to be left behind its brought the narrative around a "fine" game to being the epitamy of the worst thing in gaming.
@@cookie8162Same faulty logic can be applied to the 8s, 9s & 10s the game got at launch, after the blatantly obvious "paid" reviews from the majority of US gaming & tech outlets. So the point of your critique is moot. :)
It's a 6/10 experience, at best. And, for an AAA game that was supposed to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, the palate cleanser after that embarrassing Redfall fiasco, this savior of the XBOX way of life, it failed miserably & unequivocally.
And this is coming from a Game Pass Ultimate subscriber, so save any SonyPony rhetoric for someone else.
I grew up playing bethesda games, quite literally. Morrowind, oblivion, skyrim, fo3, and fonv were all amazing games, but a few of them were also a bit behind the times when they were made. Fo4 was a good game, but it wasnt a good fallout. Then fo76...yikes. this game needed to be their savior, they flopped
With fo4 they tried to innovate too much. A brand new build system, changing the game mechanics with vats, massive weapon modifications, etc. The weapons part was cool, but the building system is atrocious and somehow got worse with fo76
Their next massive mistake was letting a small team that wasnt even their A list team develope fo76. A title in one of the most successful game series of all time that wasnt also going to be made online. This shouldve been handled by their best employees, but it wasnt
Then, starfield. Its not a bad game, but it isnt good either. The worst thing about starfield is they were so damn close to making an amazing game, but fell short at nearly every turn. No water exploration, yikes. The characters almost all have no personality, even though bethesda is good at making good characters typically. No melee??? How did they fail to make melee when they made skyrim? One of the most played games of all time??? They also let artificially generated shi take up way too much space. They needed more hand crafted areas, way more. They needed to also have limits so people stop running into the exact same building on 12 different planets in a row. They simply couldve designed way more buildings so you only run into similar builds a hand ful of times and it wouldnt be hard because its ai generated
They tried to innovate way too much when all we want is for them to stay with their roots and be a fire studio again, not a dumpster fire studio
Starfield's fail might save TES VI. If bethesda is willing to learn, but so far their reactions to critque towards starfield has been so stubborn, that i have no hope at this point for TES VI.
"Bethesda." "Learn." HA!
Yeah same, I honestly have 0 hopes for TES6.
@@BaslightBatekeepBoyboss😂
Bethesda learning somthing? People have told them repetedly why things are not good for decades in their games, yet they do f all about it. And with Starfield they dubbled down even trippeled down on the feed back. Bethesda isen't going to learn jack S unless Microsoft TELLS them to get their S together. I higly doubt the next Elderscrolls game is gonna be any where near as good as skyrim was. And honestly skyrim wasent that good either, it was okey. Got better with mods, especially mods that added it's own storry and quests.
Bethesda might not learn.
Microsoft might
All I can say is, I barely made it to 50-60 hours on Starfield but my current god knows how manyeth Skyrim save is already at 80 hours and I still come home from work excited to play Skyrim
I just think, once you have a favorite BGS game, and see that the modding community is alive, everything following it looks like a lesser version of your current favorite.
They pointed out Balder’s Gate 3 and Cyberpunk before Starfield launched, and had to preempt that “while we see those games, gamers shouldn’t expect an identical experience as those when playing Starfield”
Basically informing us ahead of time “This is gonna be kinda shallow compared to those games”
So at least they know where the industry is going, but whether they follow suit or not, will remain to be seen in ES6.
Thanks for your comment btw dude, super appreciate you for it :)
Funny, I have never finished Skyrim. I enjoy it very much don't get me wrong. I have started a few saves over the years and put close to 100 hours in. My love for Starfield has made me want to finish it once and for all. I don't remember much about fallout 4 it has been so long, I am waiting on the next gen upgrade to finish that again. So, Starfield has reinvigorated my love for Bethesda and FPRPGS.
On the other hand I am at about 160 hours with Starfield and I just started a new stealth pirate build with parents and the dream home starting perks. I am still seeing things I didn't in my first run. New game Plus is ridiculously neat as well. I don't want to ruin it, but the story essentially continues after the main questline is over with different little events and subtleties that make it different every time and there is no limit to the amount of playthroughs. I highly recommend jumping back in once the expansion releases. If you can get over the need for fast traveling and mediocre exploring at times, it is a pretty fantastic RPG that is slowly improving and will only get better.
@@lotsathedetox BGS employee detected.
@@Neognostic-pk5wu lol nope. Just some 36 year old dude in Canada. Starfield is still in the top twenty most played on Xbox. A ton of people are still playing on Xbox compared to steam. It's not like I am the only one who loves the game.
@@lotsathedetox well, there's no accounting for mediocrity or the people shilling for it. Not sure why you'd share that here though, given it's clear where other people stand and you aren't going to change those people's minds by telling them about your 160hrs in game, or robotically writing about the "subtleties" in a game that has no sense of differing consequences and plays out the same on every quest, forcing you to play it one way. So why did you brainfart on here?
I'm not saying modding is a bad thing but saying that modders will add so much to the great template bethesda made is such a bethesda fan thing to say.
A game should be good on its own and shouldnt be fixed by the community
other games that are considered great also have just as big modding community so it's hardly any excuse for them to say but you can mod our game
If the modders are doing a much better job than the devs, then something is terribly wrong with the devs, and that's one way we should all use to evaluate them.
Devs are doing what they are told to do. I work with some of them and it's always frustrating to see your work change because of corporate decision, usually money driven.
Some of the best modders are devs and work in the industry so they have the skills, just not the freedom.
This is always such an ignorant narrative. Modders take a finished game and are handed finished modding tools, and then have infinite time and 0 oversight to do whatever they want without having to worry about their changes working well with what someone else is trying to do. Developers can never have that freedom because everything they do has to work with everything every other dev on the team is doing, and they have to finish by specific dates.
There's also a limited number of Devs vs an ever increasing number of modders with ideas eating away at them, the skills to execute and nowbthe platform to do so
Also bear in mind the survival bias: You only see the successful modders. If a mod is bug ridden, then the mod wont get attention and nobody says that the modders are garbage
@@EccentricMeat Yes... But how do you explain the difference in quality between what Bethesda is doing and what the others game dev studios are doing? And how do you explain the inherent similarities between Starfield and Skyrim? They haven't made a game from scratch.
My obsevation with BGS is in each new game they release they add some shiny new features that add little to no depth while removing old ones that do.
F4 added more cinematic dialogue with a voice player but the dialogue was very basic and limited compared to FNV who even took in account skill levels.
Player agency seems to get worse every new entry.
They are leaning on the you are special gimmick, dragonborn, starborn even with F4 they were contemplating to give the player special powers.
The BGS formula is an old brick wall they keep removing bricks from while adding new paint hoping the paint somehow holds it together.
At least starfields dialogue tree is better than 4 :D, granted still a very dated game though.
(Please note that i am talking on a TECHNICAL standpoint, since we have more than 4 options in dialogue and the protagonists words arent entirely voiced except for alternate universe selves).
Nah voiced protag in a bethesda rpg is dumb, go play a cod campaign if that's what you want.
Never say BGS developed New Vegas, that was Obsidian
the outer worlds is a pile of brahmin dung. obsidian isn't good.
...
It was published by Bethesda Softworks they licensed it to Obsidian
@@Tommygotbeats yeah published means they just paid for it
Saying Bethesda made New Vegas is a slap in the face to the developers at Obsidian who had only 18 months to make that glorious game.
After playing Witcher 3, Cyberpunk 2077 (after CDPR fixed it), and Baldur's Gate 3, I cannot bring myself to go back to Bethesda's library of mediocre slop.
this is a great take. i enjoyed skyrim as a 12 year old, and the nostalgia is nice to look back on, but compared to those games you mentioned, they make skyrim look like a text based adventure. 80% of the content in skyrim is just repetitive mindless combat and the other 20% is weak stories at best. looking back, nothing of the story is really memorable or interesting
I was playing Starfield and BG3 around the same time but eventually dropped starfield and never finished it. I did finish BG3 and start multiple more playthroughs though :)
Played TW3 and 2077 afterwards then now Fallout 4 since it was on sale for quite a good price and man the difference is quite stark.
Bethesda ain't all bad but they definitely are not the icon people (used to) make them out to be. 6/10 games that are fine and serviceable but nothing special.
And this is the problem with all modern gamers you're all hooked on those super high-tech cutting-edge next-gen copy paste bullshit that's a game even looks slightly less graphically advanced you will not play it we didn't have this kind of problem back in the Golden age gaming
And also don't call starfield mediocre when cyberpunk 2077 is no better they spent way too much time on the graphics and not enough on anything else hyping the game up for 7 years to release a barely functional mediocre piece bland overrated garbage
@@Doyoueverwonderwhywerehere When did we ever say we played the games listed for the graphics? Sure Cyberpunk is known for looking good but guess what, most people don't have a GPU that can run it up to those fancy levels. The other two mentioned look good but aren't graphics focused at all.
Have you played both Cyberpunk and Starfield? If you have please explain how Cyberpunk is bland compared to Starfield.
My honest issue with them Is todd. His entire stated design philosophy is "To look at a game and where others are adding mechanics to their game Im looking to Find mechanics to remove." Also the fucked up the tone of fallout and i hate them for that two reselling skyrim 30 times didnt help either.
Hey, nice work Arky. As an original FALLOUT Dev, I appreciate the compilation 🙂
No zeitgeist crap for me I paid 115 dollars of my hard earned money to place a dull, passive, not awe inspiring at all. Story was broken and up itself and the lack of basic features was a joke. Honestly I am a 39 year old man why have Bethesda lost their ability to take risks, not even a single character swore or drank booze or drugs or even did anything slightly edgy, the whole game felt on rails PG kid safe ESG shitfest. Don’t even get me started on the wank followers all being goody goody knobs. The game oozes fear of modern weirdos finding any problematic in the game just shoot bad guy be hero select pronoun eat bugs woooooo.
This is why i just pirate everything now and only buy it if its any good. Cant trust them to not make garbage, cant trust reviews because they are all idiots also.
This is worded perfectly
Keep going 🤣🤣🤣
And there's no gore. You can't reduce NPCs to meaty bits or strip them down to their skivvies.
Exactly
Not to get all gray-beard on you, but I was just out of college when Arena came out. I found it by chance in an Electronics Boutique and loved it. Games weren't wildly advertised then, so I was lucky to find it. It was unbelievable for the time. The 3D rendering, full screen (as opposed to Ultima Underworld's version, which was a small window) just blew me away. You commented about the "dumbing down" of successive Elder Scrolls game, you're right. It started immediately. I loved Daggerfall, in spite of being buggy as hell -- but they eliminated the Passwall spell from Arena, which many fans complained about as "dumbing down." It continued with the loss of flying in Morrowind. So, yeah, Bethesda has been headed down this path for a long time, gradually distilling the RPG experience into an action game. It kinda sucks, and after Starfield, I have given up hope they even know how to make an open-world RPG. I barely give a damn about the next Elder Scrolls game, for the first time in decades.
Not a chance! I actually wish I had your anecdotal experience to further enrich the “dumbing down” section further, because I had no idea it had been happening even before Morrowind!
Major shame they’re going the ways they’re going, it seems everyone who grew up with them get to watch them dilute themselves into literal water.
Thanks for the comment though buddy! I’m a super small channel, so they’re always mega appreciated :)
I still want to go back and play the first two. There's a TH-cam creator that kind of tutorializes it the same way Zizaren does Path of Exile (I've made four level 90s and might understand 20%of the game?) But Oblivion was the first I got sucked into, a friend tutorialized the game with me and I *was* there. I was the sneaky cat man in the dungeon. And when I got to the dark brotherhood (and was admittedly very stoned) I was talking to a voice acted vampire in charge of an assassin's guild. That felt like the pinnacle first person "this is dungeons and dragons digitally". When Skyrim came out I don't think I put 10 hours into it.
SkyUI was great. But when I got my Quest 2, Skyrim VR (with mods) it made it actually playable and immersive. I still despise the reworked menu compared to oblivion and the stat changes.
@@ceninant, keep in mind that Arena and Daggerfall are going to be rough. Maybe check them in reverse order, just to acclimate yourself. Use Daggerfall Unity, rather than the original (there was no mouselook; it wasn't a thing, then). Arena hasn't had a remake, so it's going to feel pretty primitive. Hell, it felt primitive by 2005 -- but the freedom given to the player is pretty amazing, even if the controls might make you cry in pain.
Also removed climbing and breaking doors from Daggerfall
@JHiggins67 I'd enjoy to see how "grey-beards" as you put it would design a modern RPG leveraging both modern technology and your experience in D&D and RPG experiences with reflects to mechanics, world building, etc. Always been one for enjoying more complex games than "follow the yellow brick road" ones so to speak.
I remember when Starfield came out because I got Outer Worlds the week before. Everybody called "the Poor Man's Starfield" but now I'm the one laughing and enjoying a $40 investment instead of decrying my $70 investment.
I'll be laughing tomorrow, when it'll be free lmao.
Too bad Outer Worlds suffers from the same issue New Vegas does, where radically different environments all feel the same, and are really bland.
Yeah, Obsidian really knows how to make a great and enjoyable game, but they're kinda homogenous too.
@@therobustempyrean1436as mediocre as outer world was, it was still light years ahead of anything Bethesda has made. Sad!
@@therobustempyrean1436I’d rather that , then what starfield was.
Tbh i don't care abt bethesda anymore. I just play the old games and enjoy them. I do this with all companies after they falloff
I miss the 1990's. The video game decade (after going through the New Wave 1980's). The high point of video games.
2D will always be better than 3D.
my dogass old laptop made me unable to play AAA games in recent years, it made me check out the indie space where games are less demanding, there i discovered the joy of gaming again, where innovation is still well and alive. now when i see people got disillusioned by the gaming industry i always recommend them to check out indies. good games do still exist people, you're only looking at the wrong place
True
The difference between fromsoft is that they expand on mechanics and gameplay loops found in previous titles, whereas bethesda seems to regress in design with every additional title.
And that From is passionate and talented studio.
I don't have the game but have watched many playthroughs on youtube from various people. I can't help but be reminded of other games. Mass Effect, Outer Worlds. It feels like ideas have been directly lifted from other games. How did this take 25 years? If ever Elder Scrolls 6 is released I don't hold out much hope tbh.
The Mass Effect vibes are REAL strong throughout, until you realize all the aliens are missing and then you wind up considering running another run of Mass Effect Trilogy lmao!
Thanks for the comment btw! As a small channel, it’s insanely appreciated ^^
I am a very old gamer. I go back to the Atari 2600, the 8-bit computers, and the golden age of the quarter-eating arcades. When I discovered and played Daggerfall (many years after release), I had already seen other game studios and beloved franchises go through their life cycles and finally go into terminal decline. Daggerfall was unlike anything I had previously encountered. Its world was huge (albeit also very empty and very repetitive - sound familiar, anyone?), and its RPG systems had a level of depth and complexity that few other games came close to matching. It was also janky and buggy, and it could be unbalanced at times - either too difficult or far too easy. I hadn't played many 3-D games at the time and preferred (and still do) a top down view, so it was hard to get used to it.
By the time I finished Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion were out, so as soon as I acquired a computer capable of running them (for a long time, my computers were not up to date in gaming capability, so I usually played games that were rather old), I moved on in the series. Ultimately, Morrowind ended up being my favorite. Its systems are somewhat simplified from Daggerfall, but there is still enough for an old RPG fan to chew on. What Morrowind got right, and in a way that I hadn't seen since Ultima VII, was an open world that had a real sense of place, was full of hidden places and little secrets to discover, and truly felt lived-in, full of people and full of assorted junk to collect. Bethesda has never been great at standard narrative or quest design, but with Morrowind and the subsequent games, all the way through Fallout 4, Bethesda picked up where Origin Systems left off when the Ultima series went into decline, and they took environmental storytelling to a new level. I can tolerate the mediocre stories, the jankiness, the lore inconsistencies, the oversimplified systems, and the annoying action combat, but if the seamless exploration and environmental storytelling ever fall off, then the whole structure will crumble.
I haven't bought Starfield yet. I know better than to buy a Bethesda game shortly after launch. Unfortunately, I see some troubling signs from reviews and game play videos. The unnecessarily huge size, and with it a heavy reliance on procedural generation and the resultant emptiness and repetitiveness, gives off strong Daggerfall vibes to me. Daggerfall was a fascinating experiment for its time, but it is not a fun game world to explore after the novelty of its size wears off. Nowadays, the concept of Daggerfall in space with simplified systems is not particularly innovative. In addition, the invisible walls and the broken-up nature of the world (which Daggerfall does not have) will likely detract from the experience. However, if Bethesda comes up with some meaty expansions and the modders treat the empty spaces as blank canvases on which to build their own rich and interesting worlds, Starfield could come into its own in a few years. It might have descended into mediocrity and therefore might not have the same magic as earlier titles such as Morrowind, but it might eventually be fun to traipse around in its broken-up universe while largely ignoring the main quest, much as I do with Skyrim and Fallout 4.
Given the problems with Fallout 76 and Starfield, my perception is that Bethesda is in a state of decline, much as Origin Systems was at the tail end of Ultima VII and more clearly with Ultima VIII. Sadly, Ultima IX was a disaster, and it was the bitter end of Ultima as a single player franchise. (Ultima Online was a successful spin-off, but I don't want other people in my games, so it was never relevant to me.) I would hate to see Bethesda follow a similar trajectory. Starfield has received a lot of criticism, but it has sold well and isn't a complete disaster. However, if the trend doesn't turn around and a vitally important release such as Elder Scrolls 6 fails, that could be the end for the single player games, and as with Ultima, all that is left might be a couple online games that somehow hold onto enough of an audience to persist.
Phenomenal write up, and I agree through and through!
I experienced similar concerns in another video I did on Starfield, and mentioned how absolutely make or break ES6 was going to be for them. Fallout 76 could have been written off as a B-Team game in regard to plausible deniability. But with Starfields vast, and unnecessary emptiness and hollow open world design philosophy, it’s beginning to become impossible to deny what’s in front of us. If they don’t nail ES6, I do wonder what lasting impact that could have on their structure and ambitions.
Here’s hoping for a successful ES6 launch, but…I just don’t know anymore :/
Thanks for the comment btw heather! Super appreciate the comment as a small channel ^^
This resonates pretty heavily with me even though I wasn't introduced to Bethesda until Fallout 3. The exploration and environmental storytelling is what keeps me coming back more than anything, and I'm okay with much of the other jank thats there so long as there's effort to make things better with each new entry. Definitely concerned with where they're going, and hoping they take some of the criticism to heart.
I gather you're not a fan of other people in your game, but seeing as you enjoyed fallout 4, it may be worth trying fallout 76 if you haven't. I know it had a pretty atrocious launch, but it's come a long way from start, and offers some solid exploration fun and can be played in your own private world. I feel it, like Starfield, had potential to be much better had they given it more honest effort.
As an OG gamer myself, I can tell you that if you enjoyed all the other Bethesda games you will like it. It is a victim of the internet hate campaigns. I could make a video about a ton of games and pick at the stuff I don't like or if I changed my mindset everything could be dumb and terrible.
The critic reviews are the most accurate takes you will get versus content creators with an agenda. Reviewers are just gamers like us who might be better at writing. Clearly, nobody was paid off either because the biggest outlets like GameSpot and IGN had two of the lower scores at 7/10 and those are the ones they would go after. I have never been so into a game with so much hate. I have learned a lesson with this game. I will ALWAYS try something before I decide if I like it or not. Some TH-camr who is no different, no better than you or I, isn't going to have the same likes, dislikes, agendas, wants, needs whatever. I am not picking on this guy either, I am picking on everyone who jumped on the hate bandwagon to Maryland. I guarantee that this game will be looked at favorably down the road just like Oblivion and Fallout 4.
@@lotsathedetox Hate campaigns are a common problem, so while I will consider the information that is out there (and I see some things that concern me), I won't come to a final judgment about Starfield until I get around to trying the game for myself. Bethesda games, and for that matter, many other large and ambitious games, are generally a better experience after they have had a few years to cook. I'm in no hurry. In two or three years, I'll give it a go and see how things have shaken out.
Ultima VIII, which looked horrible when it came out, eventually got some patches that mitigated some of the worst of its issues, such as the platforming that had no business ever being in an Ultima game. I tried the final fixed version many years later and, while it still has problems and isn't the greatest Ultima experience, there are a lot of interesting ideas at its core, and it is a fun world to explore. Even when a series or game studio is in decline, a game might still be worth playing. Looking at Starfield from the outside, it looks to me like an Ultima VIII-type situation is the worst case scenario.
@@Carlisle73 I've heard that Fallout 76 has improved. It might be fun to explore, but I have resisted online multiplayer games for all of my gaming life. I have No Man's Sky, but I play it offline and have never connected to the servers. If No Man's Sky didn't have that option, it wouldn't be in my collection. Gaming is a solitary activity for me, and I don't like the idea of someone else being out there in the game world, even if I am unlikely to encounter them. (Also, for reasons related to game ownership and preservation, I reject all games that have an always-online requirement.) If an offline single player game ever exists on the Fallout 76 map, I'll give it a try.
You tried, man. For real.
But Starfields biggest problem is the fact that it is, actually, not a very good game. And, imo, not a very good Bethesda game, either.
I gave it a fair shot on release. Without watching or hearing anything. In fact, my friends talked about how great their time with the beta was. And I was quite excited after watching the Xboz showcase, too.
Refunded it after 10 hours citing technical problems. It was boring. With bland characters and cardboard-like world. And it's quite disheartening, cause the game really did have potential. But did not have a creative vision that would shape it in a better way.
Bethesda is the old saying “If you try to please everybody you’ll end up pleasing nobody.” And starfield is THE culmination of that. Is it a space sim? Barely. Is it an RPG? Barely. Is it a survival game? No. Is it action adventure? Barely. It wants to be everything but it can’t just settle. Even a fundamentally good narrative and world building can be enough to save a game. Morrowind and New Vegas are really good examples of this within Bethesda lol. Although those games knew exactly what they wanted to be, which starfield doesn’t. The opposite can also be true. Fallout 4 has pretty terrible story but is actually a genuinely good dungeon crawler, I literally only play it to shoot and loot the vaults, military bases, etc…
Somehow, starfield still has fans tho
The momment they adopted the "keep it simple stupid" mentality they died for me.
I can't decide whether to "agree", "agree", "agree (sarcastically)", or "disagree (but actually agree)" with that statement.
@@drsnova7313 agree ( with the red option) its red, surely means the ouchies are coming.
I don't think keeping their ancient engine for modding purposes is a good enough excuse. I think doing things in order to support modders is good, like Larian adding official mod support to BG3, but choosing to NOT do something in the name of supporting modders is just actively being lazy, and in Bethesda's case, is just hurting the experience for everyone who chooses to play without mods.
I think the reason all Bethesda games are a certain way is because they all have to adhere to the rules of their creation engine that can only make games in certain ways.
Probably the same reason Fallout suddenly became a first person game instead of an isometric one.
Pretty much although a fallout structured like Wasteland 3 would be awesome
The base engine is a lot more versatile than what Bethesda actually does with it. The original Gamebryo was made with 'action RPG's' in mind, but was used in a lot of other games; even Civilization used it at one point. It can do an isometric game if thats what you want to make.
Bethesda are just...well, a bit sh*t to be honest.
It's what you get when the people who currently work at Bethesda have to come up with ideas on their own, rather than coasting on the work of more creative people who either left long ago or never worked for them in the first place.
The first 5 min of this video should be said with a subtitle after every sentence. "Ten years ago".
Man this makes me feel old. I've been a hard-core gamer since pong was new. As someone who's pretty much seen it all and worked in the industry I have to say this video is on point and you have a new subscriber.
Pong or starfield?
All I’m saying is if I can’t use a Gauss rifle in Elder Scrolls 6 against dragons in space, I’m gonna be pissed.
Actual video starts at 5:45
Bethesda management and devs deserved *exactly* what they got. You can't constantly demand maximum payment for minimal effort and then cry about people demanding better for their money.
Then there's the avid disdain the devs and management show to their customers. They *constantly* mistake gamers for "fans" that they are benevolently bestowing "favors" to... but we're not. Players are first and foremost *paying customers with rights and reasonable expectations* . We buy games with a reasonable expectation that when we pay a premium for a *product* that product will be complete, made with care, and be as described by the marketing/advertising.
I can't remember when they last delivered on any of that, yet they *constantly* treat their customer base like spoiled children crying because we didn't get a second cookie with our milk. I mean look what they said when customers paid hundreds for the special ed of the last fallout game and got shit products in the kit!
As far as I'm concerned, they're worse than EA/Bioware and I'll probably never purchase another game of theirs. There are better games at more reasonable prices from studios that respect their customers and treat their staff well. Why would I buy from studios like Bethesda anymore?
Ancient gamer here (50) But liked this video. I appreciate you pointing out what an older generation thought of Fallout 1 and 2 and how we see the newer content. I fit pretty much into that category even though I played thousands of hours of Fallout 3 and 4. Fallout 1 and 2 are light years better in the areas that make these games fun. (lore, story, immersion, replayability)
Haha absolutely buddy! I’m glad you enjoyed!
And yeah, reality is gaming is generational. Fallout’s 1 and 2 weren’t exactly Coca-Cola sized conglomerates at their release, but they meant an awful lot to gamers back when they initially dropped. So imagining what it would feel like to grow up playing these games, hearing a big company bought them up, and changed the lore, the direction, the core concepts and more…and getting praise for doing so…I really do get how people would hate Bethesda on that level too.
When the ecosystem of ideas say: “Bethesda is bad, they release bad games”, you have to ask how much of that was simply earned overtime.
I super appreciate your comment btw dude, thanks for giving my video a shot :)
You should really give New Vegas a shot. NV is on a whole other level, and it has a mind blowing, ridiculously high number of ways stories can play out. You can side with the freaking raider hordes for crying out loud.
The character progression in Fallout 1 and 2 was my favorite part. Finding your first gun in a locker. The first time your melee or heavy weapons skills were high enough to just shred your enemy into literal pieces. That and Random Encounters while Fast traveling across the map. Starfield could have done this to break up the mundane fast travel.
@@arkyUS_YT They took Chess, made it into Checkers, but still called it Chess. It was cheaper for them to make Checkers, but they made more money selling Chess. It's plain and simple deception and that's why people were mad.
Somebody's gotta say it eventually...
Preface ≠ pree-face
Preface = preff-fiss
Almost everybody gets that one wrong, and hardly anyone notices
Another thing: swathes is swaythes not swoths. Also the American pronunciation of twat troubles me. I should let it go but I can't
Really great video. Hope your channel blows up!
BTW Blizzard did the same thing, they took beloved games, dumbed them down and simplified them so that the drooling masses could finally enjoy them too despite being barely smart enough to plug in a light bulb and then corrupt it all by turning it into a business first and foremost, that is instead of quality, depth and individual talent, money went into commercials and monetization tricks.
Starcraft 2 plays like a WC3 mod by college kids with some spare time after playing Brood War.
If you are buying the game with the mindset of “mod will fix it” or “mods will make the game better”, you are the problem. Bethesda should be held accountable rather than expecting modders to fix/improve their game.
I wish Fallout 4 took more notes from New Vegas, 3 was my first and favorite game in the series, then my 2nd favorite New Vegas which expanded upon 3 but multiplied the RPG elements to allow lots of choices, So yeah i am disappointed that Fallout 4 went the opposite direction and made it a looter shooter with LIGHT RPG elements rather than being an RPG with heavy shooter elements. (they also killed my favorite version of the brotherhood of steel, which yes Fallout 3's Brotherhood was controversial but it was my favorite version, fuck Arthur Maxson)
I also wish New Vegas got an extra 6 months of Dev time to help patch the bugs and make it more stable.
I do miss the Spellcrafting that Morrowind and Oblivion had, i hate that Skyrim straight up removed it, Magic is the weakest form of combat in Skyrim and it makes Bretons and magic based Races feel underwhelming. Also fuck the horse Armor DLC, fucking Bethesda brought it back for Fallout 4 because "lol remember this?" Yeah fuck you Todd... -_-
I saw one youtuber with the title "Starfield is just another Bethesda game, and that's ok" No it's not ok, first off it's wrong because it has less RPG elements than Fallout 4, and it doubles down on using the same Engine since 2002, yes it's modified, yes it's been updated, I wouldn't have a problem with the engine if Bethesda did more than just "good enough" upgrades, and actually overhaul it to the point where it feels like a completely different engine, So yes, if Bethesda put in the effort to fix all these legacy issues that have existed for so many years, they could keep the Gamebryo/Creation Engine which modders are familiar with. Speaking of... What is with the "you're not allowed to criticize Starfield or you're a hater" crowd... Guess we aren't allowed to be disappointed in Bethesda, we have to just blindly like everything they make, and be excited for the next game which will have even less RPG elements, lower quality writing, and more Radiant Quests that offer pathetic rewards.
And the load screens problem, yeah "oh just put it on an SSD" That will make load times faster, but it doesnt change the fact that load screens are still there, You basically need to do like 4 RAID 0 PCIe4 SSDs to theoretically remove load screens because bethesda borked the caching systems that the engine had.
I wish Bethesda could look back at their older games and bring back what has been missing and make their newer games feel like RPGs again.
Worst part is they did take more notes from New Vegas. The faction conflict in Fallout 4 was Bethesda's pathetic attempt to copy the faction dynamics in New Vegas without understanding why it was so good in New Vegas.
Bethesda's just so out of touch that it doesn't matter who they take notes from, they won't be able to understand any of it anyways.
@@DanielJensBYeah... I do have my gripes with how they did the Brotherhood, but all of the factions have other issues too... One being the ending, The Nuke option is the ONLY option, so when they claim there are 4 endings, it's technically 2, blow up the institute, or blow everyone else up (except the minutemen)
Starfield sucks. I don’t need to waste anymore time like i did with 76 & 4.
I’ve been kinda curious about 76 nowadays tbh, since it’s had so much content added in, but I just think the game as a whole feels so damn unstable all the time. I liked 4 when it first came out, but agreed it was a major regression in depth gameplay wise.
I wish they’d focus more on making their games into deeper RPGs, and less on marketing fluff and bs.
Thanks for the comment btw dude!
@@arkyUS_YT no worries brother. I originally thought fallout 4 was going to be like the original games or nv/3, before it came out. I would search for info everywhere before it was announced. I saw the trailer and just knew. I eventually migrated to other games or just play oldies now. I don’t think it’s coming back.
@@ToastyChud The sheer amount of cash FO4 brought in for them does bum me out, because it makes sense they’d continue to focus on what they seem to be focused on…mass appeal.
And that’s fine, but it makes their game so shallow as a result. And that sucks having grown up with them :/
I’ve heard people say it’s fun as a looter shooter, but even with that mindset…I just end up wanting to play a different game, set in the Fallout world in my head.
Hopefully Obsidian gets its shot one day to make NV2 now that Xbox owns them both. Fingers crossed! 🤞
@@arkyUS_YT that would be amazing man, but like you said, beth is happy to keep their cash-cow going. Even though the games are objectively bad as long as they sell they will continue to release shoddy projects. A lot of this probably comes down to people on reddit who defend the games no matter what & enable this cycle. Gamers themselves are usually pushovers that will buy anything for the titles. And the fact that Beth cut obsidians bonuses & I’ve heard Todd say it’s not on the table.
The craftsmanship & love that went into fallout 1, 2 3 & NV is unmatched. Something that could only come out of a small studio that works day & night for their passion project. As sad as it is, I don think it will ever happen. Beth cheapened the fallout name & now the new generation is oblivious to what it once was.
And I agree what you said about 4. Fallout 3 at least was dark and believable in terms of lore and atmosphere, but the art designer who created it -Adam, died. Fallout 4 is goofy, the buildings look like playhouses(generic, repetitive) the factions are ludicrous, characters dull, brotherhood a shell of what it was supposed etc etc. if they can’t do the bare minimum I don have any hope left. But I will never forget what fallout did for me & it will always hold a special place in my heart. Thanks for the video friend. I’d appreciate more on this topic as in my opinion it can’t be stressed enough. Hopefully years down the line another studio will get a chance.
Bro... What you said about Fallout 4 is _exactly_ how I went about it too. "I saw the trailer and just knew." Being a massive FO3/FNV fan, FO4 was just a proper kick in the guts. Lol, almost a decade on and I'm still kinda salty about it.
3:51 to prove your point of how rare it is, that example of Cyberpunk 2077 isn’t even an IP they created, it’s an IP that has existed since the late 80s called Cyberpunk 2020.
19:45 is where this guy finally confesses that this video is 70% about himself and his feelings about games, 25% about Bethesda, 5% about Microsoft and 0% actually about Starfield.
Oh but he does ask you to keep an eye out for his "real" Starfield video.
Did we watch the same video? That's clearly not true.
I used to play the demo disk games, remember a few as you do when recalling chindhood memories, it was something special and hard to put into words yet the culture or vibe of early 2000s for games and gamers felt tight.
I built my first gaming computer in 1998 but I never heard of Fallout until FO3 came out. I love the setting and it's just a coincidence that I went to elementary school basically exactly where Vault 101 was located.
Love the Austin from Shoddycast vibe of the video 👍
"Starfield's a pretty good Bethesda game" completely undermined the entire 29 minutes of this video lol
I was shocked to see you only have a little over 3K subs. This video is really well done. Keep it up. I am sure this channel will grow. This was a very good video. You can tell you did your research. Also I will never forget horse armor. I remember when that happened and my friends and I laughed and said "no one is dumb enough to buy stuff like that in a video game." Boy were we wrong.......
As someone who genuinely enjoys playing Starfield, this video is comprehensive and its easy to both see and hear that you are an actual Bethesda fan. and seeing and hearing this from a different perspective has been very interesting.
That was an overly drawn out discussion about no much.
Bethesda are a huge game studio with a CEO who’s primary focus is earning money and is not concerned about the game being fun.
Todd doesn't even strike me as a gamer.
"Morrowind, Oblivion (which is the best one), or Skryim" Yep, I love it here
This popped up on my recommended, seen the low view count and was going to skip, but I decided to go against that judgement. So happy I did! Awesome video, I’ve subbed, looking forward to more fontent
Tex! Thanks so much for giving it a shot dude! I’m definitely trying to get my own little foothold going, so I majorly appreciate you giving my video a spin and enjoying what you saw!
Hope your new year has been well so far :)
Skyrim is where they peaked and its been all downhill after that
and that was 2011
Skyrim is where they peaked cosmetically, Daggerfall is where they peaked mechanically and Morrowind is where they peaked as a complete game.
Many would argue against that, Its when they introduced Quest markers was the downfall
@@catriona_drummond Yep. Everything past Morrowind has been downhill
this guy's well spoken, thats getting hard to find on youtube. subbed, its so refreshing
>10k hrs in Skyrim since 2018 after my WoW addiction was broken, Starfield 1.3k hours between launch & early Jan when I finally decided to try BG3 (hilariously I bought it during development but held off since I was an old school D&D nerd and wanted to experience it complete), and BG3 I'm at 300 hrs in a month (and hilariously I haven't even left act 1 yet). I didn't have any hopes for Starfield (I'm normally not into sci, mostly fantasy). Honestly, I liked the idea of what they did with NG+ but there were just too many shortcuts taken. I ran to NG+13 to see all the different universes and it felt shallow after I 100%'d NG+13 to see what differences there were in quests as a Dragon *cough* I mean Starborn. It had potential and I don't regret my purchase but with all the reused content on generated planets/locations really hurt because I was hoping for their historical environmental story telling. Ok, I'm done rambling.
God the new game plus idea might be the single best concept they’ve put down in god knows how long now lmao
But that alone can’t fully carry a game for you. I do hope, for the sake of fans who really adore digging into their games and living in them, that modders can enhance and provide diversity of experience for the game, because it is a cool template of a game, that’s missing heart, depth, detail, and all the traits everyone once fell in love with BGS for when they played their first BGS game.
Thanks for the comment btw, I’m a super small channel so any and all feedback, comments, and perspectives are so very helpful!
@@arkyUS_YT agreed. The NG+ was where the game truly could shine, but again, it felt like they didn’t put a lot of effort into it as I redid all the factions, most quests, etc. There’s a hand full of times it felt like it mattered but mostly it just turned into a dialogue choice to skip other dialogue. I mean, how cool would it have been if while you’re out discovering things about the Unity & Starborn, if all the sudden Sarah turned to you and realized what you were, even if you were “pretending” to be normal? It was a truly amazing idea, but it didn’t feel like they did much with it. I’ve been taking a break from SF and playing BG3 finally and I’m enjoying that, but I’m curious in a few months if BSG can make some great things happen… I’m pretty active in the Skyrim modding community and from what I’ve seen, most of the modders that considered moving on (kind of like after SSE came out) have basically abandoned the idea, which is really sad because if anything all that wasted randomly generated content space could use is mods to add variations of POI’s, new suits/weapons, etc
I remember playing fallout 3 for the first time as my introduction to fallout and instantly becoming a fan of the franchise and by extension bethesda. In the 15 years since I have come to hate bethesda and what they have done to my precious fallout.
The paradox of Bethesda is that a terrible studio that has been making terrible games for the last 20 years is being extolled as some creators of “great games”. The only good game they have anything to do with is New Vegas. And that game wasn't made by Bethesda.
title says starfield, half of the video he talks about not starfield.
Title is called why Bethesda deserves starfield, maybe read more of the title than "starfield"
I’d argue that Slay the Spire and Portal are perfect games
God it’s hard to argue against either of those, even if I’m impartial to Portal 2, but I suppose if you weren’t a fan of the humor, I could see Portal 1 being preferable.
Thanks for the comment btw! :)
The very idea of a "perfect game" is... candid to say the least.
These are cultural products. Like music songs/albums, paintings, sculptures, movies... the main difference being that games are interactive. What you consider "a perfect work of art" might very well be trash to the next person, and vice versa. There exists no objective and definitive way of measuring them through every lens.
@@simonak9699 idk, some things just accomplish what they intend to do differently
Like the game of chess, I don’t think it can be improved upon
It’s a happy accident like a deck of cards
@@channelbuckybronson1993 Exactly! There can be art on a chess board or deck of cards, but it doesn't change or even affect the fundamentals of the gameplay itself.
The editing at 3:15 is God tier 🤣
Great video and great channel, man! This channel will blow up, in a good way!
Just curious, but what is your profile pic from?
My own art. I'm a comic book artist.@@jrgonzalez3845
@@jrgonzalez3845 I drew it.
Damn. Rather than sucking the balls of off Bethesda's past and reliving the old glory days, you should really just focus on the present and just look at how bad Starfield is. It doesn't take 5 hours into the game to know that the game is terrible, and so are the minds in charge at Bethesda.
Hell, an echo chamber spouting truths is still spouting out truths, especially if they're all saying Starfield sucks and they explain and prove their points.
What I most liked about Starfield discourse was that almost every video criticising it found new problems, that others didn't talk about. It's just so fundamentally disjointed, that you can take it apart for hours and still not get to the bottom of it.
Game is terrible is a meaningless nothing of a complaint. Why? Or did the echo chamber not teach you those lines to parrot?
This was incredibly well done. You managed to hit a lot of important topics that are relevant to not only this topic, and are prevalent in every part of culture today, with brevity while keeping everything tight and cohesive. I couldn’t do that. Fantastic video essay all around. I think you got to the heart of a lot of things that affect the perception of the company and this game specifically.
I got like 20 hours out of this game somehow. I really tried, but I just couldn’t be bothered to keep going unfortunately. I wouldn’t say I’m a “Bethesda fan”, but I’ve enjoyed a decent amount of their previous stuff. Maybe that’s the same thing, I don’t know. I just mean to say I don’t care about the company. But this made me think about them in ways I haven’t previously which I appreciate.
I do hope modders do some awesome things with this though. It makes me question if I actually like the games I thought I did since I mod the crap out of them now.
Morrowind. I bought my first PC and a 21" CRT specifically to play it, and it was the only game I played for YEARS. Between Tribunal, Bloodmoon, endless output by the modding community and my own custom mods, it never got old. I was so deeply immersed in the world that for a decade afterwards I had vivid memories of my explorations. Not memories of [i]playing[/i] it, mind you. No, they felt exactly like the memories of things I have physically experienced. I loved Skyrim (with fast travel turned off), but Morrowind . . . Morrowind was a masterpiece.
I dont know how you could be so immured into something like Morrowind and still think skyrim is anything but average before mods
the idea that only 30% of criticism of starfield is valid is ludicrous and ignorant in the extreme. Please do not surpass 4k subs
Wow.. WHY does this video has so many dislikes?! This world makes no sense anymore. This was the one good analysis that I've seen about this all mess.
I've never seen a publisher known for single player rpgs so desperate to squeeze their fans for money
Their business model is ridiculously insulting especially when they're competing with titans like Elden Ring & Cuberpunk just in recent years
Bethesda games formulae peaked in 2007 with Oblivion, which was a step up, bar a few places, on Morrowind. Skyrim has a smaller map and significantly less content. A comparison: The Fighters guild in Oblivion has 20 quests for completion of that story arc. The companions have 13, 4 of which are radiant quests rather than hand crafted. The Mages guild also has 20 questions, as opposed to the College having 18, with three of being optional. TES games in terms of graphics, environments and character models peaked in 2002. Compare Oblivion with COD 4 or Skyrim to Batman: Arkham City, just two like-for-like examples in the same year. BGS have been lazy for a long time, Starfield was simply where they got found out.
Just found your channel. Very high writing and speechcraft skills. Grand and intoxicating.
I genuinely believe that Bethesda hasn't made a good game since Morrowind. It's just that finally the general public is starting to catch on.
Bethesda, the EA of RPGs.
As one of the dinosaurs who grew up playing Morrowind, I lost my faith in Bethesda with Oblivion, of all games. I could not look past the lack of Almsivi Intervention and the game made it impossible to strip a location clean, as fast travel option did not work while overencumbered. This was a deal breaker for me. Besides, I put all my valuables and unique items into one chest, in my office as Archmage and the bloody game reset the contents... Skyrim felt like walking around one and the same dungeon over and over, killing the same enemies over and over. Hell, even named enemies respawned. Left with a feeling that I did not make the Skyrim world any better. Useless, disposable. Pay pig, basically. No more Elder Scrolls for me, thanks.
Well I just checked nexus all the popular mods in first 2 3 pages are just fixing the game and not much else giving a d**n lol.
Great video man! Narration, as well as structure has high quality 100k+ subs vibe ;) Wish you all the best! Greez from Germany, Amir
I actually like Skyrim's leveling system where you level up skills by using them more. It makes more sense, and the main reason why we don't do that around a tabletop is because it would be a nightmare to keep track of. This is a video game, where they can automate all the math. So why not?
boring grind
The saddest thing, is there is good in the game, and it’s mainly in the little side stuff made by hand. I randomly came across a friendly ship with an older lady who was just named “grandma.” She talks about her husband passing, promoting her to fly around space RV style to keep herself busy.
16:43 "Give Me Devil May Cry 4 Mommy!" Has me in fucking tears subscribed