Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[forsaken1111]

I just hope they don't fuck up Starfield

[deoloth]

I just hope they don't fuck up Starfield

Hoping caution from how people reacted to Fallout 76 keeps them in line on that one.
Though I am a bit worried about them oversimplifying it, seems to be a fairly consistent trend with Bethesda the last several years with their properties.

[forsaken1111]

Though I am a bit worried about them oversimplifying it, seems to be a fairly consistent trend with Bethesda the last several years with their properties.

Given Skyrim's success, it's not hard to see why. Simpler games appeal to wider audiences which equals more sales and longer life. How many time have they re-sold Skyrim now, on how many platforms?

[Dunamisdeos]

I'm cool with it not being a super complex space game.

I think that genre has enough recent/contemporary entries right now (Elite Dangerous, X4, etc) so I'd be fine seeing something a little more laid back.

[Flying Dice]

I can say with 95% confidence that Starfield will be shit. Best case it's barely playable after 6 years of modding.

[forsaken1111]

I can say with 95% confidence that Starfield will be shit. Best case it's barely playable after 6 years of modding.

tbh if it's even just skyrim but sci-fi I'd play it.

[Chiefwaffles]

I can say with 95% confidence that Starfield will be shit. Best case it's barely playable after 6 years of modding.

Uh.. huh.

All we have is basically just the name and that it's sci-fi, and you're already saying this?
God, way to jump to conclusions. Why bother wasting mental energy and time calling a game you know literally nothing about shit when you could just... look at the reviews and maybe trailers after it comes out?

[Dostoevsky]

All we have is basically just the name and that it's sci-fi, and you're already saying this?
God, way to jump to conclusions. Why bother wasting mental energy and time calling a game you know literally nothing about shit when you could just... look at the reviews and maybe trailers after it comes out?

Normally I'm not so pessimistic myself, but... it's a studio that (outside of mobile) has been tinkering with the same engine for quite a number of years, has taken a general trend of 'prettify, simplify, reiterate' for its last few major entries (in my opinion), and hasn't been terribly good at the whole innovation thing. And there's the whole modding (and letting the modding community fix things) aspect. All this combined gives the impression that their pushing out into a new genre may be fraught.

I wouldn't say 95% chance of excrement, but I am pretty dubious it'll be quality. Happy to be wrong, but unfortunately not expecting to be wrong.

[Flying Dice]

I can say with 95% confidence that Starfield will be shit. Best case it's barely playable after 6 years of modding.

Uh.. huh.

All we have is basically just the name and that it's sci-fi, and you're already saying this?
God, way to jump to conclusions. Why bother wasting mental energy and time calling a game you know literally nothing about shit when you could just... look at the reviews and maybe trailers after it comes out?

It's Bethesda. It's going to be running on the same godforsaken abomination of an engine that they've been using for more than a decade now. It's going to be borderline unplayable at launch from bugs. It's going to have a bland, unfinished main story. It's going to have dungeon-equivalents that are just the same ten tiles copy-pasted in different orders. It's going to have broken physics. Odds are it's going to straight-up be reskinned TES/Fallout assets and reused code.

There are games where we can't necessarily predict what they'll be like, where there's room for optimism.

If you've been paying any attention for the past... thirteen years or so? You'd know that Bethesda games aren't in that category. This is on the same level as saying something like "Wow, how can you pass judgement on the new Call of Battlefield even though it hasn't launched yet?" If you run face-first into a door labeled "Pull" five times in a row, it doesn't take a genius to predict what will happen on try number six.

[LoSboccacc]

> It's going to have a bland, unfinished main story

and then the oblivion manager said: "player won't even save the word! he'll be watching these two huge dude punching each other in something like a cutscene, but first person and with god awful in-engine models because they can only have so much polygon and need to be scaled 30 feet tall"

sales crowd: "WHAT A TWIST"

and then the fallout manager cameth: "we need to one up oblivion! what if we pick what defined our games so far, the very thing players came to love, the open ended sandbox, and, like, remove it, killing the player at the end?"

sales crowd: "*fifteen minutes of roaring applauses*"

[Chiefwaffles]

stuff

It's Bethesda. It's going to be running on the same godforsaken abomination of an engine that they've been using for more than a decade now. It's going to be borderline unplayable at launch from bugs. It's going to have a bland, unfinished main story. It's going to have dungeon-equivalents that are just the same ten tiles copy-pasted in different orders. It's going to have broken physics. Odds are it's going to straight-up be reskinned TES/Fallout assets and reused code.

There are games where we can't necessarily predict what they'll be like, where there's room for optimism.

If you've been paying any attention for the past... thirteen years or so? You'd know that Bethesda games aren't in that category. This is on the same level as saying something like "Wow, how can you pass judgement on the new Call of Battlefield even though it hasn't launched yet?" If you run face-first into a door labeled "Pull" five times in a row, it doesn't take a genius to predict what will happen on try number six.

Ah, so it's just irrationally expanded upon opinion presented as fact. Cool cool cool.

[Dunamisdeos]

stuff

It's Bethesda. It's going to be running on the same godforsaken abomination of an engine that they've been using for more than a decade now. It's going to be borderline unplayable at launch from bugs. It's going to have a bland, unfinished main story. It's going to have dungeon-equivalents that are just the same ten tiles copy-pasted in different orders. It's going to have broken physics. Odds are it's going to straight-up be reskinned TES/Fallout assets and reused code.

There are games where we can't necessarily predict what they'll be like, where there's room for optimism.

If you've been paying any attention for the past... thirteen years or so? You'd know that Bethesda games aren't in that category. This is on the same level as saying something like "Wow, how can you pass judgement on the new Call of Battlefield even though it hasn't launched yet?" If you run face-first into a door labeled "Pull" five times in a row, it doesn't take a genius to predict what will happen on try number six.

Ah, so it's just irrationally expanded upon opinion presented as fact. Cool cool cool.

... they've literally done all of these things in all of their games that weren't.... I don't know, Fallout 4? They then proceeded to use Fallout 4 to do exactly all of these things with Fallout 76.

The irrational thing is to expect them to do anything different.

EDIT:

I think my favorite part of E3 Bethesda was how they created a goddam trailer about how they were adding NPC's and people to talk to in their Fallout game, and everyone cheered like that was an incredible accomplishment. Oh it's free? You're not going to charge me extra for basic, bare bones functionality in your game? How generous of you Bethesda. You hero.

[nenjin]

It's permissible to feel one thing but wait until proof for final confirmation. "Doubt but verify" if you will.

After 76 I'm firmly in the camp of "need reviews' with their games. Maybe 76 sucked because they gave it to a lesser dev house and didn't properly support them. The A team at Bethesda might get more money, more time, have better expertise.

[Nighthawk]

Bethesda games have been bug-riddled messes for the last who-knows-how-many years because for some reason people let them get away with it. Games that come out plagued with all kinds of issues are for whatever reason praised to the skies and all of the lack of polish is ignored by the majority of players (or modded out by the dedicated modding fanbase in mere days or weeks). If people started calling Bethesda out on this kind of stuff (which thankfully has begun to happen with Fallout 76), they might learn to do better.

That said, Fallout 76 still sold over a million copies in its first week--sales fueled on hype alone, I figure--so assuming it didn't cost them much to produce (if it really is the asset-flip that many claim it is then that's probably the case), in which case they probably still made money off it. And as long as they're making money, who knows if they'll have any reason to put out a better product.

I'm not saying the players and the fanbase are 100% responsible for lack of quality on Bethesda's part, but it would certainly help if people who played the games held them accountable for their shortcomings more often... or didn't throw their money at a pre-ordered product that they don't know will be any good.

[Dunamisdeos]

They got away with it because they were so supportive of their fan base and mod community.

I honestly got no reason to buy their stuff right now.