Starfield by Bethesda

[birdie]

Starfield is the first new universe in 25 years from Bethesda Game Studios, the award-winning creators of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Fallout 4. In this next generation role-playing game set amongst the stars, embark on an epic journey to answer humanity’s greatest mystery.

Starfield on Steam

Starfield is the first new universe in 25 years from Bethesda Game Studios, the award-winning creators of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Fallout 4. In this next generation role-playing game set amongst the stars, embark on an epic journey to answer humanity’s greatest mystery.

store.steampowered.com

 

[caroline!]

It looks nice but let me guess, it's gonna be online only.

 

[Frick]

It will be pretty but incredibly shallow, and probably really dumb, but pretty entertaining. Seen as an RPG it will be mediocre. The writing will be all over the place and it will try to tick as many boxes as possible, as made up by teenagers on reddit.

 

[AusWolf]

Looks great... for now. Let's see how it holds up to expectations 11 months from now.

 

[Vario]

Here are some recipes for Bethesda success: use a 20 year old Gamebyro/Creation Engine, hire one voice actor for all (killable) NPC with snarky voice lines, and use a persistent nauseating ambient music track by Jeremy Soule!

 

[Frick]

Here are some recipes for Bethesda success: use a 20 year old Gamebyro/Creation Engine, hire one voice actor for all NPC with snarky voice lines, and use a persistent nauseating ambient music track by Jeremy Soule!

Sprinkle liberally with what 12-year olds consider to be "awesome".

 

[Vario]

Sprinkle liberally with what 12-year olds consider to be "awesome".

It has to have a lot of really meme worthy bugs that involves NPCs glitching, facial animation bugs, and exploding.
All quests/missions involve fast traveling to a location, picking up an item, and fast traveling back!

 

[Sithaer]

I don't expect much but if its something like Skyrim in space then I'm sold.

 

[AusWolf]

It will be pretty but incredibly shallow, and probably really dumb, but pretty entertaining. Seen as an RPG it will be mediocre. The writing will be all over the place and it will try to tick as many boxes as possible, as made up by teenagers on reddit.

Sprinkle liberally with what 12-year olds consider to be "awesome".

How did you come to the conclusion that the game is meant for children? I, for one, find the commentary in this trailer way more interesting than for example, shooting terrorists all day and night.

 

[Frick]

How did you come to the conclusion that the game is meant for children? I, for one, find the commentary in this trailer way more interesting than for example, shooting terrorists all day and night.

It won't be meant for children, but based on their previous games it'll feel like it's written by children. Note how I aslo said it will be entertaining, and it might even be very entertaining.

 

[AusWolf]

It won't be meant for children, but based on their previous games it'll feel like it's written by children. Note how I aslo said it will be entertaining, and it might even be very entertaining.

Do you mean that the main story will probably be simple as buttered bread? Personally, as long as the atmosphere and general feeing of the game kicks ass, I won't mind. I also think that a simplistic story in an RPG contributes to you being who you want to be. Elaborate and carefully written stories require a well-designed main character (take Geralt from The Witcher) - which is not the Bethesda way of "free RPG" making.

 

[WhiteNoise]

I'm in. Bugs and all.

 

[Vario]

FO4 was pretty good, dumb, but good. Wouldn't mind playing something similar to that.

 

[Frick]

Do you mean that the main story will probably be simple as buttered bread? Personally, as long as the atmosphere and general feeing of the game kicks ass, I won't mind. I also think that a simplistic story in an RPG contributes to you being who you want to be. Elaborate and carefully written stories require a well-designed main character (take Geralt from The Witcher) - which is not the Bethesda way of "free RPG" making.

No, the writing in general. Look at Fallout 4. That game has no idea what it is. It's a hodgepodge of stuff (ROBOTS ON A FLYING WOODEN SHIP! ALIENS! PEOPLE DRINKING THE BLOOD OF THEIR ALIEN-INFUSED DAD TO REMAIN YOUNG! SUPER MUTANT QUOTING SHAKESPEARE LOLOLOLOLOLOLOPOASDFFHDAGAGDD). It's incoherent. A good game (especially a good RPG) should have a bigger story to tell, a deeper theme. Look at Planescape Torment or Disco Elysium for reference as to what great game writing looks like. But Bethsoft don't really do RPGs actually; the games make more sense if you think of them as action adventures with RPG elements. And look at Skyrim: it's pretty, and big, and pleasant, but the story and everything in it (at least the 60h or so stuff I looked at) is shallow, when it comes to the quests and people you interact with and how you interact with your surroundings, which is what RPGs is about. My recollection of Skyrim storytelling is non-existant, and that is after I spent many hours in 2020 playing a modded Skyrim. The world itself is great, but the things you as a player is supposed to care about are shallow and unimportant. It was the same in Fallout 4, but that game was/is so stupid I played like 40h of it just to see how dumb it was, and it's bewlideringly stupid.

Both games are entertaining, don't get me wrong, and I assume Starfield will also be entertaining. But I also assume Starfield will NOT be a good RPG as that is not what Bethesda is good at and they have, in my experience, never been good at that.

 

[AusWolf]

No, the writing in general. Look at Fallout 4. That game has no idea what it is. It's a hodgepodge of stuff (ROBOTS ON A FLYING WOODEN SHIP! ALIENS! PEOPLE DRINKING THE BLOOD OF THEIR ALIEN-INFUSED DAD TO REMAIN YOUNG! SUPER MUTANT QUOTING SHAKESPEARE LOLOLOLOLOLOLOPOASDFFHDAGAGDD). It's incoherent. A good game (especially a good RPG) should have a bigger story to tell, a deeper theme. Look at Planescape Torment or Disco Elysium for reference as to what great game writing looks like. But Bethsoft don't really do RPGs actually; the games make more sense if you think of them as action adventures with RPG elements. And look at Skyrim: it's pretty, and big, and pleasant, but the story and everything in it (at least the 60h or so stuff I looked at) is shallow, when it comes to the quests and people you interact with and how you interact with your surroundings, which is what RPGs is about. My recollection of Skyrim storytelling is non-existant, and that is after I spent many hours in 2020 playing a modded Skyrim. The world itself is great, but the things you as a player is supposed to care about are shallow and unimportant. It was the same in Fallout 4, but that game was/is so stupid I played like 40h of it just to see how dumb it was, and it's bewlideringly stupid.

Both games are entertaining, don't get me wrong, and I assume Starfield will also be entertaining. But I also assume Starfield will NOT be a good RPG as that is not what Bethesda is good at and they have, in my experience, never been good at that.

I see what you mean, and I somewhat agree.
I too prefer a well-written story that keeps me engaged, but I consider Bethesda's games of a completely different category. The general public calls them RPGs because you have skills that you can upgrade, but I'd rather call them medieval/fantasy (The Elder Scrolls) or post-apocalyptic (Fallout) atmosphere simulators. Like you said, they are entertaining because of the environment, music, some NPC interactions and side quests. They're supposed to turn you off, not turn you on like a regular story-driven game does. I can easily spend hours in Skyrim doing absolutely nothing. I have 100+ hours in it with most of the map discovered, and no meaningful progress in the main quest. I totally love Mass Effect, but this is something I can't do in it, as it's not centred around its atmosphere as much. In ME, you have to progress with the story, otherwise you'll get bored, which I think is equally fine. The Witcher games are a perfect middle ground. Great story combined with great atmosphere - no wonder they're my favourite games of all times.

 

[AsRock]

Yeah i am done with Bethesda so i be skipping this, be really funny if it was on the MS store only.

 

[Vayra86]

But but... what is it? RPG a la Mass Effect? Skyrim/Fallout? Star Citizen? Does it have ship to ship combat.. is it open world or linear?

I mean... a year isnt long? All we get is a fancy sandwitch and rocket thrusters plus an astronaut face?

I see what you mean, and I somewhat agree.
I too prefer a well-written story that keeps me engaged, but I consider Bethesda's games of a completely different category. The general public calls them RPGs because you have skills that you can upgrade, but I'd rather call them medieval/fantasy (The Elder Scrolls) or post-apocalyptic (Fallout) atmosphere simulators. Like you said, they are entertaining because of the environment, music, some NPC interactions and side quests. They're supposed to turn you off, not turn you on like a regular story-driven game does. I can easily spend hours in Skyrim doing absolutely nothing. I have 100+ hours in it with most of the map discovered, and no meaningful progress in the main quest. I totally love Mass Effect, but this is something I can't do in it, as it's not centred around its atmosphere as much. In ME, you have to progress with the story, otherwise you'll get bored, which I think is equally fine. The Witcher games are a perfect middle ground. Great story combined with great atmosphere - no wonder they're my favourite games of all times.

Nailed it. That is what defines a good open world RPG really, too IMHO. In every TES and Fallout game you can easily conceive your own stories. The content is just there, deal with it. Even the main story arc barely ever interferes. Progression is hardly halted because you miss X or Y from the main quest. Maybe you cant reach all the things then, but you can go max level and kit no problem. Difficulty is also completely arbitrary.

The Witcher sort of interferes with your progression, the level gating is proper aggressive and you need specific tools to win quite a lot. And levelling off the side quests is pretty grindy too. In TES or FO all you do then is hit Sneak and stab something. But maybe you can also say this all results from TES and FO being abysmal in combat or balancing.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

I don't expect much but if its something like Skyrim in space then I'm sold.

Fallout based.

How much anyone wanna bet the game needs a major patch within 60 days.

 

[defaultluser]

FO4 was pretty good, dumb, but good. Wouldn't mind playing something similar to that.

No, it was too dumb for me - they simplified the conversation options down to a maximum of three, even though you have 4 directions on that d-pad They also genericized lot of responses (to make it even clunkier to use)

They spent all the missing dialog budget on one of the worst Settlement Simulators ever made I think of Actraiser when I think about how painful Settlement building in in Fallout 4 - Actraiser for their boring and single-threaded game design influences)!

By the time I got to the stadium, I got bored by the obvious quests that had been written by a 5-year-old (while painfully dealing with the three-direction dialog tree also thought-up by that same 5-year-old.)

I'm not paying them money for anything else until they show me the first half-hour of gameplay (get outside the intro, and then check the dialog trees)

 

[Liquid Cool]

How much anyone wanna bet the game needs a major patch within 60 days.

I'm giving it a week....

Best,

Liquid Cool

 

[AlwaysHope]

I just love how criticism of a game that's never been released makes for humorous banter. Carry on....

 

[Totally]

I'm giving it a week....

Best,

Liquid Cool

Psssh, It's gonna have a day 1 patch and still have bugs so legendary that'll make EA blush.

Edit: That or it's released as a "beta."

 

[Vario]

No, it was too dumb for me - they simplified the conversation options down to a maximum of three, even though you have 4 directions on that d-pad They also genericized lot of responses (to make it even clunkier to use)

They spent all the missing dialog budget on one of the worst Settlement Simulators ever made I think of Actraiser when I think about how painful Settlement building in in Fallout 4 - Actraiser for their boring and single-threaded game design influences)!

By the time I got to the stadium, I got bored by the obvious quests that had been written by a 5-year-old (while painfully dealing with the three-direction dialog tree also thought-up by that same 5-year-old.)

I'm not paying them money for anything else until they show me the first half-hour of gameplay (get outside the intro, and then check the dialog trees)

I just played it as a shooter and skipped through conversations.

 

[defaultluser]

I just played it as a shooter and skipped through conversations.

This is exactly what they want you to do - dumb it down so they can generate record sales, all while users like you "skip the shit," unofficially apologize for ever questioning The Great And Powerful Oz

If there's no RPG here, then why do you put-up with one of th most broken FPSes ever, all as some kind of compromise? You do recall Skyrim and Fallout 3 being decent RPGs, right?

 

[Timelessest]

Once Bethesda meant great RPG, but after Fallout 4 and 76 I am not really excited about this game. There's a good chance that the choices will be fake like in Fallout 4. Also, there will be so many bugs that Cyberpunk will be jealous.