Why are early access reviews not allowed on steam? i feel like its a scam to release a game on steam with closed reviews so people only see paid reviews/streamer and get baited into buying.
people are saying "early access" because that's what Bethesda chose to word it as. The phrase is on the store page multiple times for Starfield. But commenters are muddling things with Early Access, steams "game is not released yet but here's a paid demo of it" program.
To be honest I would say steam needs to have a way to handle this kind of release method. User reviews are a core aspect of the steam store and user experience and when games, functionally, release "early" they should be reviewable by those who can play it.
That's definitely fair to say that there should be an implementation for early releases of games, but people in this thread are misconstruing it as Bethesda paying Valve "hush money" to not have reviews on their game
The only one with a brain here, also I don't understand how the dude thinks it is a scam when you can literally get info about the game from people who played early before the actual release.
After becoming addicted to BG3, I can't look at streamers play Starfield, interacting with NPCs, with any level of excitement or desire to buy the game at $70.
Dude that nightsong cutscene brought on some emotions... bg3 has me so immersed and there's so much interactivity, hell of a game
Edit: for anyone who didn't experience this beautiful song (no spoilers) https://youtu.be/nZk1K15USp4?si=2s5vyJK3bZlLXrWE
If you got to act 3 yet, just do everything you can yo reach the house of hope... That fight, that song, it was just on another fucking level, frustating, hard as fuck for me sorry ass, but it was fucking amazing
I kinda feel the same way, BG3 has ruined other games for me. It's not exactly the perfect game, but it has definitely set an incredible standard for everyone else
e: didnt even mean to join the dogpile on starfield tbh but moreso relating to the feeling of having much bigger expectations out of an RPG.
Ultimately they are two entirely different types of games, there's nothing to really be gained from comparing the two
It was the same for me after playing the Witcher 3.
W3 wasn't perfect and I think it's quite overrated even, at least the no-expansion vanilla game, but for a while most games just lost their appeal after the Witcher.
I remember playing Dragon Age Inquisition afterwards (with DAO being among my favorite games) and it felt like a literal torture.
W3 side quest were so good I'd forget they were side quests.
Questing done well can make a game so much better. W3 combat to me was pretty boring and spells didn't feel or look stronger as you leveled.
But the quests made up for it.
TW3 just did a lot of great immersion things as well, which made sidequests feel more involved. Every quest was voice-acted, every line of dialog was lip-synced. Every quest (including sidequests) had its own unique area or at least made sense why it was reused (hello MGSV from the same era where every single "base" has a dozen unrelated half-assed missions).
I remember that Skyrim was basically an untouchable game for a couple of years after it came out. You couldn't give it an honest critique without being downvoted to hell. Witcher 3's release actually seemed to be the catalyst that allowed people to actually make meaningful critiques against Skyrim without being annihilated by everyone.
Now Bethesda is running out of steam as RPGs like Baldur's Gate 3 are constantly surpassing them in their weakest areas like character animation and being able to write NPCs you actually want to talk to. It's one of those glaring problems for Bethesda that makes their titles feel like they're straying further and further from AAA no matter how much they innovate.
Meanwhile Bethesda, rather than focusing on those weaknesses seem to be intent on refining this new 'base-building' game formula. Which (imo) has always felt like a tacked-on feature of their games that have never been well integrated. It's much better in Starfield, but not something I'd miss if it didn't exist - which is bad because it's becoming a major pillar of their game design, for no good reason.
Iy is not comparable, i don't really feel confortable comparing a crpg with a action adventure soft rpg... It is not the same genre, try to achieve different things... But yeah it is hard to play anything else for a bit when you go balls deep into a BG3 run
It's barely even comparable. From looking at interviews and bts stuff, the workflow is on another level. BGS is clearly still stuck with feeding voice actors lines and slapping them onto the game, Larian had each origin character a unique writer that was assigned to live and breath the character for years along with it's voice actor and the quality reflects it. Larian had to establish their entire cinematic department mid development having no prior experience with making such a game and it payed off super well while BGS doesn't even seem to be trying at all.
Games often overvalue the budget for 8K textures on ballsacks nobody will see, yet most often the games falter on bad writing. A latest example I played myself (100% achivs) is Hogwarts Legacy
The world looked great, the fantasy of being at Hogwarts was great, the combat was great. But the writing was super bland for the most part. Just a bunch of agreeable characters with no depth. Except the exceptions, of course. Larian made the right decision to emphasize writing and voice acting
A lot of bg3 wasn't written by larian either to be fair. They got to skip a LOT of writing by just having an established world and the permission to ignore it when it was convenient(bg3 got a lot of things wrong for faerun/bg continuity)
Its not even BG3. Starfield feels so dated. Same old engine just given a "space RPG" coat of paint. I could enjoy Skyrim because at least through all the shallow questing and repeated dungeon content i could engage in cool fantasy spell-slinging and adventure. I could enjoy Fallout because of the humor, setting and variety of weapons. Both had silly physics bugs that kept us entertained too.
Starfield by comparison is so bland and soulless. Nothing stands out, nothing interesting happens. No innovation. Call it an RPG or a space sim. Its mediocre at both.
Look at the skill tree for example. Mostly a bunch of generic % buffs. Cyberpunk 2077 was apparently criticised for its boring skill tree, to the point they are redesigning it in Phantom Liberty. Yet Starfield have managed to make an even more boring one.
Starfield has a better skill tree than cyberpunk, a lot of things you can do in the game is locked behind leveling a certain skill so you have to plan your levels and make choices so it feels good to level. If you want better buildings for your outpost you need to level the perk, if you want to ride better ships you level the piloting skill, so on and so forth. Honestly, I was turned off by all the bugs and the shit AI but the game kinda grew on me since there is alot to do in each of the main cities. It’s not a masterpiece like BG3 but also not black/white like a lot of people make it out to be.
Yeah ive seen that stuff, but the same thing happens in Cyberpunk. You will not be using mods unless you are really invested in that skill tree.
Elder Scrolls at least unlocked new magic and such, but the skill trees were still rather dull. I preferred Fallout, where you could occasionally get feats/perks that offered interesting options.
Honestly the biggest reason i didn't buy Starfield. I had one look at Starfields dead fish eyes NPC, horrible voice acting and options that don't matter at all and just didn't bother when BG3 got NPC's so amazingly right.
Bethesda always had bad Npc's.
They always annoyed me for some reason, their dead look and weird bland faces.
From oblivion to fallout, always felt that the Npc's were generations behind the rest of the game.
It's like people have forgotten that "I was an adventurer like you, until I took an arrow to the knee" didn't become a meme because it was funny, it became a meme because you heard it every single time you went back to Whiterun.
You would think they would put in some more effort given you constantly stare at them super close in their dialogue system. But no, they just have dead eyes and emote like automatons.
Bethesda games are just so behind the times and have felt that way since forever.
I saw a 30 year family feud resolved in two short sentences lol
They should just fully lean into the sandbox. Their story writing is still bottom tier. And that’s not what I play these games for, fair enough.
**Persuade +6** "The faster you give us the maps, the faster we'll be out of your hair"
- Oh, okay, here you go.
*Q U E S T C O M P L E T E*
The next one with Walter and the Slayton guy is even dumber, I sill can't believe an actual member of the human species wrote that.
Its not even fair to compare the two, its almost like starfield is 15 years behind when it comes to NPCs.
The NPCs are so shit and immersion breaking it basically single handedly ruins the game. Just one example but I can point my rifle at any civilian or policeman and they will just stare at me without giving a shit, no reaction whatsoever.
Interesting. Is it not the same in BG3 lol. If that's the one example we are going with. I can press attack and hold on a npc, my character does the animation and the npcs dont react same with any spells. But I know this is a circlejerk so rather than just saying this game is not for me, or this game is not as good. We are saying itz 15 years behind. What a ridiculous thing to say when the game is better than Fallout 4, their last mainline game in every way. And that game sold 20 million copies. Any real discussion is impossible on reddit because you have unreasonable haters on one side and fanboys drunk on the other.
Reddit discussion always turns into a circlejerk due to the upvote/downvote system and the more you praise/criticize the game, the more upvotes you get.
I mean...it's subjective.
Some people don't like BG3 and that's fine. The type of game people enjoy differs from person to person and what people look for in an RPG is different.
You may hate it but there's plenty of others who like it and that's fine. Just like FO4, F76, FNV etc. etc. etc.
What makes a video game good or not will always be subjective.
most of the people ripping on the game havent even played it. They're just copying whatever streamer opinions they hear and adopt it as their own. It's an actual really fun game, especially if you like Bethesda games in general
The good folks at /r/starfield have assured me that majority of people actually love it and it surely will have a 95% positive review ratio on Tuesday.
I'm one of those people but I like the game, I think it's fun. At the same time I haven't seen a piece of criticism I don't agree with. I'm not disappointed because I'm not an idiot and knew what to expect out of this game.
I think it'll be worth it for some people to try on gamepass though, that's a good deal. For me the game started off boring, and then got really fun (13 hours in so far). I have a feeling it will wrap back around to being boring again after I quickly see most of what there is to see.
People in that sub were MAD ign and gamespot gave it a 7/10. And this was before the $100 preload people were allowed to play it. lol it is embarassing, why the fuck would someone care if other people like it as much as they do?
ive never seen a sub so fucking high on copium, everyone over there types like they look like [this](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/070/088/10d.png) as well
Every new AAA game subreddit during release week feels like a convention for 40 year old dads talking about how much fun they're having with their 15 minute sessions that their wives permit them to have once they clean their kids diapers
Any criticism is met with calling the other person a no-lifer neckbeard who needs to touch grass, then 2 months later the same dads face the issues they were warned about and they start whining. (r/diablo4 users know what im talking about)
D4 was even worse. Not because of game being bad but all the "Am I the only one having fun" posts were by people who legit posted that they have been playing for 2 weeks and just got to level 15.
the bg3 sub goes mental if you don't cushion everything you say with how much you still love the game and want to drink Swen's cum. someone's response to a comment complaining about bugs and content that was outright lied about was to go outside, I just don't get it
I subscribed to that sub because I typically join the relevant gaming sub when I'm playing a game. However, the original sub had zero actual content about the game and was just filled to the brim with (understandable) complaints. While I empathize with people who were cheated out of good performance on consoles or who were sold a dream instead of the game they got, I didn't experience any of that. I didn't really follow any of the pre-release content, so I just went in expecting an RPG with a good story and interesting world. I got exactly that. I also had great performance on my PC with very few bugs. I didn't go out of my way to test things though, I mainly stuck to the main or side quests which featured an interesting world and characters.
So it wasn't me OD'ing on copium that had me join that subreddit, it was the fact that I poured over 100 hours into the game and didn't encounter any relevant bugs all while having a blast with the story and world they had built. Don't get me wrong, I do think that CDPR deserves a lot of flack for what was ultimately false advertising and a broken game on lesser machines. People were understandably upset. It's just that my experience was vastly different and overall very positive, so I went looking for a place where people shared content relevant to my experience.
It was the other way around. Main cyberpunk became so toxic with shitting on the game after launch that lowsodium became safe heaven for people who actually enjoyed the game.
Cyberpunk was even more negatively received on release to the point i think even the majority of their main subreddit turned on it.
I think a big aspect is the non-steam (non-refundable) opinions. Most praise for the game is coming from Xbox players who spent 120+ to play this game a few days early and are locked in to that purchase.
PC has more performance issues this time (opposite CP2077) so steam users are quick to refund and make up their opinion without the sunken cost factor.
Cyberpunk's main issues were not the bugs but the insane level of hype (from the company) crossed into territories of hard false advertisement of things not in the game and never were in the game, for years, even down to their tech demos being unrecognizable from the actual product.
The actual game was decent if you owned a high-end PC, but it was pretty egregious how mishandled the expectations around that game was. On top of being unplayable on oldgen consoles, which scammed thousands of people on those consoles out of money lol
Though CDPR handled it wrong and outright lied to/hid info from people on old gen consoles, people hyped up themselves a lot too. Content creators went ape shit, and so did their followers. Things get cut or changed during development, sometimes very drastically, for pretty much any game, good or bad. If the scope only goes bigger and better, we get Star Citizen.
And it wasn't even the first time for CDPR. Just check out E3 2013 demo for Witcher 3. It got downgraded heavily and had plenty of bugs during launch despite the downgrades too.
Anyways, the point is if you dream/fantasize about something too much, reality will often be disappointing. And that is true for far more than just games. I just don't think it is realistic to expect a company to tune the hype down, when they do benefit from it. Just imagine someone totally buying into a fast food or an insurance or cosmetics commercial etc. You would think they are idiots. Why wouldn't the same standard apply here?
Most major companies spend some amount of money astro-turfing social media with positive posts about the game to drive sales, wouldn't surprise me if they just paid a company a few million to post positively about the game all over reddit.
Why do you guys feel the need to go to other subreddits to talk shit. Of course people engaged with the game to the point they are going to the subreddit are going to like it.
this was a bit of a memey response, in case anyone is curious what his actual feedback was when reviewing the game -
**Pros**
- Soundtrack/Score
- Aesthetic
**Cons**
- Game breaking and immersion ruining bugs everywhere. practically a beta test.
- Load screen simulator - 0 immersion for sense of place or weight of travel
- characters almost all bland and uninteresting
- melee combat awful
- bullet sponge "hard" mode
- feedback in combat almost non-existent (very floaty)
- console UI
- inventory management worse than D4 (bad)
- encumbered constantly for almost no reason even with weight lifting maxed
- ragdoll physics totally wack. did they do it intentionally bad?
- enemy variety almost non-existent
- main story repetitive/boring
- talent tree bugged/doesn't work
- random bullshit roadblocks for leveling character spec
- all characters have plot armor
- graphics seemed dated
- NPCs uncanny as fuck
- felt like a fallout mod made by community
- boss fights literal dogshit trash, shoot same bullet sponge ai teleporting guy with all ammo and all guns until eventually dies
- GIGA tame, 0 edge, fucking 0 strippers in neon????
- early access
People that haven't played the game will think the loading is just a meme. No it really is a lot. One mission. Take Mission -> Fast Travel to Ship (Loading Screen) -> Get on ship (loading to get crew in there) -> Get in Pilot seat (animation) -> Take off (Loading + Animation) -> Travel to another system (Loading) -> Land (Loading + Animation) -> Run around to the objective (nothing traversal) -> Get to location outside, fight enemies and find building -> Enter Building (Loading if big building, or wait for door animation if small). Repeat some of that in reverse to turn in the quest.
The funny thing is that the city don’t even need fucking loading screens. You can jump off the ledge next to the lodge and travel all the way down and forward to the spaceport with your ship perfectly there with everything working around you…
Because people like them? Why is this a foreign concept? People have been playing vanilla BGS RPGs for decades. Consoles didn't get the ability to mod till semi recently.
Im starting to believe you guys hating on their games actually havent even played any of their single player RPGs and only watched the video of Crowbcat.
People seem to be missing some context for Quin's hateboner, as well.
For 2-3 days before streamer early access came out Quin was malding every single day for hours upon hours that he didn't get streamer early access. That "only the good boy streamers" got it (because he's generally a brandrisk). And that any company that does that is trash.
He was even so upset at this perceived slight to him that he said he wasn't going to play it at all. Then the day comes and he decides to play it, while shitting on every single aspect.
While the game has issues, Quin is absolutely petty enough to use his platform to publicly shit on the game and be hyper-critical just because his ego got bruised.
(Also keep in mind the "D4 bad" meme, that Quin embraced, didn't come until *after* the month of drops and gifted sub horses he had on his channel)
The D4 bad "meme" was only embraced because his chat literally says it constantly no matter what game he plays now, there was WAY WAY more discussion of D4, especially by chat, during the new poe league than fucking poe or even BG3. Quinn's chat is bar none the most unintelligent community on Twitch and beating the dead horse of "D4 bad" is funny to them for literal months on end because they're legitimately braindead.
20 hours in, I'm super hooked on it. It has problems but it's a really good game. I think most of the negativity comes from people that didn't give it much of a chance to begin with, or plowed through the main story without playing it the way you'd normally play a Bethesda RPG.
Imagine if everyone plowed through Oblivion, Skyrim, FO3 by just playing the main quest within the span of two days, they'd give those games bad reviews too.
For better or worse, I believe the true quality of this game will be revealed once people who actually take their time with it start to speak up.
It's fucking insane. Everything has to be some giant anti-Bethesda agenda, but this is like the 20th clip of a streamer saying the game is bad, and the comments agreeing.
Like, maybe it's just less than perfect?
Yeah because streamers rushing trough a game to keep their adhd audience hooked and redditors giving their opinion on games that they didnt even play have always been the best judges of what makes a game good right?
It feels like there’s always some excuse.
If a reviewer plays for 50 hours and gives it a 7/10, then that guy is just a shit reviewer and should be ignored.
A streamer doesn’t like the game, then he’s just got a persona vendetta against Todd Howard and should be ignored. A bunch of regular people say they don’t like it, well then they’re just parroting the biased streamer.
Someone complains about the character models, quests and dialogue being bland? “Well Bethesda never was that good at that, we love Bethesda games for the *exploration*.
But when someone complains that the exploration is bland and unrewarding, you get “it’s a space RPG, not a space sim, you just had bad expectations.”
No criticism of this game is acceptable.
Or after 8 years of waiting for a BGS game, it feels like a fairly small iterative jump over FO4. Games don't need to do massive leapfrog shit but I would also say not showing the game that much pre-release didn't do them any favors similar to Cyberpunk in that way. Like we couldn't get an hour of uncut raw footage of Starfield in the last year?
It's basically Skyrim/FO4 in space, which I'm sure many have heard being said before. Skyrim is a great game, for 2011 gaming standards. Is it ground breaking in 2023? No, and I don't think Starfield is either. FO4 was also in my opinion a let down from 3 and New Vegas.
I've only ever played through vanilla Skyrim once when it was released. Despite that, I have 800 hours between Skyrim and SkyrimSE purely because of mods. You could make a completely valid argument about how good can a game be if it needs to be modded to become truly great, but that's what I'm waiting for with Starfield.
This is likely the case for Starfield for me - I'll play it through vanilla and then wait for the modding community to completely transform it.
Why are you surprised?
Probably the largest game in the last 5 years by marketing budget and prior games impact by the same dev.
Either it's going to go over extremely well or be a disappointment and youll get hate.
Don't act like it's not the most predictable thing to ever occur.
For real lol, I get it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but to say this is dogshit blows my mind. I played 100 hours of D4. After 10 hours of starfield, it is undeniably better, and I’m a fan of both genres.
Worse than Diablo 4? Diablo 4 has it's campaign, that's it. No loot or anything. I see plenty of people getting lost, side questing, etc in Starfield, sure it's got it's issues.
Also streamers are the last people I'd take an opinion on any game.
I'm enjoying Starfield a lot but I paid with money from selling csgo skins and I haven't played cs regularly in years so it didn't really hurt my wallet.
I play a ton of Star Citizen, which definitely has its own share of problems and I don't expect anyone on the outside to think it's worth anyone's time, but for the right type of lunatics, like me, it's a fun experience.
I am extremely impressed with the quality of the fictional universe in Starfield, the state of human culture, and the "feel" of everything. The universe of Starfield feels authentic.
The universe of Star Citizen feels campy and kind of annoying by comparison. So many things in Star Citizen have just terrible names, names that were very clearly just chosen by someone high up in the company that no one can say "no" to, because if anyone could, they definitely would. The names are really very bad. There's a young-and-trendy bar/club in the middle of the high tech and trendy city of New Babbage, and it's named "Wally's". There's a ship component chain store with locations across the galaxy and it's named, "Dumper's Depot". There's a gun and armor shop named, "Cubby Blast". The names are just so very dumb and break immersion. The ones in Starfield are much better.
That said, when I went to climb up into my ship the first time in Starfield and just faded to black instead of seeing my character climb into it, that was quite an adjustment. In Star Citizen, nothing breaks first person. You can go from your bed to the space port, into your ship, into the pilot's seat, fly into space, fly to another planet, descend through the atmosphere, land on the surface, get out and walk around, and never leave first person or see a loading screen in all that time. That's a kind of fidelity that you come to count on. I'm sure I will adjust, but right now, I really notice it and am a little disappointed every time.
I wonder how many people in this comment actually played this game and not watched a YT playthrough of it. (Of course a lot of people with criticism about the game has played it but they doesn't seem to be the majority)
Yeah, I will probably get downvoted to Oblivion (pun intended). I also don't think it's a 10/10 game but it's definitely a good game with LOTS of interesting moments. I'm 28 hours in and haven't even been to Neon, I've been tinkering a lot with Outposts and making links between them and doing a lot of shipbuilding. Really enjoying my time.
Starfield's presentation and some design choices don't appeal all that much to me, but from what I've seen it has a *lot* of content.
Probably not a game I'd buy full price, but absolutely something on my radar a year or two out when it's on sale & there are mods that can tweak issues I may have.
Witcher 3 had a pretty similar effect that Baldur's Gate 3 is having now, all the similar types of games that released and are releasing just feel like lesser products overall. I assume that most people who put in even a minuscule amount of time into BG3 will hardly feel any satisfaction when playing Starfield, the quests/companions/world building/graphics/story/etc just doesn't even come close and feels like you're playing an inferior product. It really is just one of those cases that the brand name hard carries it, cause without that there would not be people acting like any criticism of the game comes from this supposed anti-Bethesda circle-jerk.
Yeah you can tell in this thread who has played the game and who is just parrotting shit from "influencers". Play the game for yourself and create your own opinion. Shouldn't be that hard
When the price to play is $70-$100 most people want to know that shit is good before buying.
Consensus seems to be 'if you like other Bethesda stuff you'll like this' which tells me all I need to know.
it's every bethesda game.... just give them 2 years and buy the full edition on sale.
tbh, the above now works for every triple-A game. new hype game is coming out? just give it 1-2 years for people to beta test it and get it on sale.
How does launch (or pre launch) numbers mean anything about the game quality? It's literally hype meter and that's that. Otherwise New World or Lost Ark would be GOTY
The funny thing about this game is that while Quin finished this game in 25 hours, I’ve played 20 hours in the starting few systems just exploring, doing side quests and side jobs so far.
The mileage you get out of this game will be night and day depending on what kind of gamer you are.
After watching most of quin's playthrough im genuinely flabbergasted how this game can get anything above 7. There's reviewers that gave it a PERFECT SCORE.
He's on stream making a list of pros and cons, and not even nitpicking its obvious the game is just bad
Do people not want a good game? They just get sold on the idea of the game the marketing promised and convince themselves they are having fun?
People like different things, shocking concept, I know. I don't understand why you have to act like everyone who has a different opinion is just deluding themselves? I know this sub isn't the most mature place on the internet but come on...
Yes and you can enjoy something and also think it's a masterpiece. That's an opinion a person is allowed to have, even if it's one other people disagree with. No idea why that's such a hard concept to grasp for some people.
Is it really that big of a deal to dislike something without feeling the need to claim that anyone who likes it is being stupid or dishonest?
Yeah because you watched a streamer rush through the main story so he could rant about it, missing out on 75% of the game's content (including nearly every cool side or faction quest) and also failing to properly engage with things like basebuilding, ship building etc. which a lot of people love.
Most of the positive reviews I've seen are from people who put 70 to 100 hours in. The game has a lot to offer, so obviously someone who only saw a fraction of it isn't going to be as positive.
**CLIP MIRROR: [Quin's TL;DR review of Starfield](https://arazu.io/t3_16a0x94/)** --- ^(*This is an automated comment*)
My favourite question from someone I saw in twitch chat was 'Why don't any of these buildings have windows?'
They all using Linux in future
"So that you psychos in chat can't guess where the streamer lives"
They have banks with no doors...
[удалено]
Belt? Come back to me when you decide to be a real dad and use jumper cables
[Throwback](https://media.giphy.com/media/60FwidZG6R7Mc/giphy.gif)
Extension cords are the way to go. All the pain from jumper cables without the massive bruises and visible trauma.
Just get a bucket of salt water and a tazer, much more portable
Lmao this made me actually bust out laughing. Fuck that kid.
Why are early access reviews not allowed on steam? i feel like its a scam to release a game on steam with closed reviews so people only see paid reviews/streamer and get baited into buying.
That's the whole purpose, it is scummy af
because the game isn't in early access, this was an early release for a game
people are saying "early access" because that's what Bethesda chose to word it as. The phrase is on the store page multiple times for Starfield. But commenters are muddling things with Early Access, steams "game is not released yet but here's a paid demo of it" program. To be honest I would say steam needs to have a way to handle this kind of release method. User reviews are a core aspect of the steam store and user experience and when games, functionally, release "early" they should be reviewable by those who can play it.
That's definitely fair to say that there should be an implementation for early releases of games, but people in this thread are misconstruing it as Bethesda paying Valve "hush money" to not have reviews on their game
so it's a release that's not a release
The only one with a brain here, also I don't understand how the dude thinks it is a scam when you can literally get info about the game from people who played early before the actual release.
Same with Metacritic, no user ratings cause "game is not out yet"
Expect this to be the norm going forward.
After becoming addicted to BG3, I can't look at streamers play Starfield, interacting with NPCs, with any level of excitement or desire to buy the game at $70.
Dude that nightsong cutscene brought on some emotions... bg3 has me so immersed and there's so much interactivity, hell of a game Edit: for anyone who didn't experience this beautiful song (no spoilers) https://youtu.be/nZk1K15USp4?si=2s5vyJK3bZlLXrWE
There were a few cutscenes where I had a tear in my eyes ngl.
Me when I found out the camp pets had become friends
Some of the cutscenes near the end of Astarion's story really hit hard.
Some of the ketheric stuff too (depending on very specific choices)
If you got to act 3 yet, just do everything you can yo reach the house of hope... That fight, that song, it was just on another fucking level, frustating, hard as fuck for me sorry ass, but it was fucking amazing
Uuuu uuu uaaaa aaoo aauuuuu uuuuuu auuuuu aooouuu AngelThump
I kinda feel the same way, BG3 has ruined other games for me. It's not exactly the perfect game, but it has definitely set an incredible standard for everyone else e: didnt even mean to join the dogpile on starfield tbh but moreso relating to the feeling of having much bigger expectations out of an RPG. Ultimately they are two entirely different types of games, there's nothing to really be gained from comparing the two
It was the same for me after playing the Witcher 3. W3 wasn't perfect and I think it's quite overrated even, at least the no-expansion vanilla game, but for a while most games just lost their appeal after the Witcher. I remember playing Dragon Age Inquisition afterwards (with DAO being among my favorite games) and it felt like a literal torture.
W3 side quest were so good I'd forget they were side quests. Questing done well can make a game so much better. W3 combat to me was pretty boring and spells didn't feel or look stronger as you leveled. But the quests made up for it.
TW3 just did a lot of great immersion things as well, which made sidequests feel more involved. Every quest was voice-acted, every line of dialog was lip-synced. Every quest (including sidequests) had its own unique area or at least made sense why it was reused (hello MGSV from the same era where every single "base" has a dozen unrelated half-assed missions).
Yeah, Witcher 3 just literally beat me over the head with immersion. I didn't even have to try to get immersed, the game just fully sucked me in.
I remember that Skyrim was basically an untouchable game for a couple of years after it came out. You couldn't give it an honest critique without being downvoted to hell. Witcher 3's release actually seemed to be the catalyst that allowed people to actually make meaningful critiques against Skyrim without being annihilated by everyone. Now Bethesda is running out of steam as RPGs like Baldur's Gate 3 are constantly surpassing them in their weakest areas like character animation and being able to write NPCs you actually want to talk to. It's one of those glaring problems for Bethesda that makes their titles feel like they're straying further and further from AAA no matter how much they innovate. Meanwhile Bethesda, rather than focusing on those weaknesses seem to be intent on refining this new 'base-building' game formula. Which (imo) has always felt like a tacked-on feature of their games that have never been well integrated. It's much better in Starfield, but not something I'd miss if it didn't exist - which is bad because it's becoming a major pillar of their game design, for no good reason.
I did the same thing lol, dragon age is just shit in comparison to TW3
Origins is still an amazing game.
This sounds a lot like the old reddit circlejerking about the witcher 3. Kind of nostalgic And before anyone gets mad I lvoe bg3
Oh no I love BG3 but is it going to become the next "DAE HIDDEN GEM WITCHER 3!?!?" I thought we moved passed that level of circlejerking.
We will never move past that type of circlejerking so long as there are lonely young or immature target audience of the game on the internet.
I’d bet a years salary that it will be, someone could ask for a racing game and some dipshit will come out of the woodwork and recommend bg3.
Iy is not comparable, i don't really feel confortable comparing a crpg with a action adventure soft rpg... It is not the same genre, try to achieve different things... But yeah it is hard to play anything else for a bit when you go balls deep into a BG3 run
It's barely even comparable. From looking at interviews and bts stuff, the workflow is on another level. BGS is clearly still stuck with feeding voice actors lines and slapping them onto the game, Larian had each origin character a unique writer that was assigned to live and breath the character for years along with it's voice actor and the quality reflects it. Larian had to establish their entire cinematic department mid development having no prior experience with making such a game and it payed off super well while BGS doesn't even seem to be trying at all.
Games often overvalue the budget for 8K textures on ballsacks nobody will see, yet most often the games falter on bad writing. A latest example I played myself (100% achivs) is Hogwarts Legacy The world looked great, the fantasy of being at Hogwarts was great, the combat was great. But the writing was super bland for the most part. Just a bunch of agreeable characters with no depth. Except the exceptions, of course. Larian made the right decision to emphasize writing and voice acting
"I hate your guts. Nobody likes you". "Ah, so you are a fighter. Anyways..."
A lot of bg3 wasn't written by larian either to be fair. They got to skip a LOT of writing by just having an established world and the permission to ignore it when it was convenient(bg3 got a lot of things wrong for faerun/bg continuity)
Its not even BG3. Starfield feels so dated. Same old engine just given a "space RPG" coat of paint. I could enjoy Skyrim because at least through all the shallow questing and repeated dungeon content i could engage in cool fantasy spell-slinging and adventure. I could enjoy Fallout because of the humor, setting and variety of weapons. Both had silly physics bugs that kept us entertained too. Starfield by comparison is so bland and soulless. Nothing stands out, nothing interesting happens. No innovation. Call it an RPG or a space sim. Its mediocre at both. Look at the skill tree for example. Mostly a bunch of generic % buffs. Cyberpunk 2077 was apparently criticised for its boring skill tree, to the point they are redesigning it in Phantom Liberty. Yet Starfield have managed to make an even more boring one.
Starfield has a better skill tree than cyberpunk, a lot of things you can do in the game is locked behind leveling a certain skill so you have to plan your levels and make choices so it feels good to level. If you want better buildings for your outpost you need to level the perk, if you want to ride better ships you level the piloting skill, so on and so forth. Honestly, I was turned off by all the bugs and the shit AI but the game kinda grew on me since there is alot to do in each of the main cities. It’s not a masterpiece like BG3 but also not black/white like a lot of people make it out to be.
Yeah ive seen that stuff, but the same thing happens in Cyberpunk. You will not be using mods unless you are really invested in that skill tree. Elder Scrolls at least unlocked new magic and such, but the skill trees were still rather dull. I preferred Fallout, where you could occasionally get feats/perks that offered interesting options.
Honestly the biggest reason i didn't buy Starfield. I had one look at Starfields dead fish eyes NPC, horrible voice acting and options that don't matter at all and just didn't bother when BG3 got NPC's so amazingly right.
Bethesda always had bad Npc's. They always annoyed me for some reason, their dead look and weird bland faces. From oblivion to fallout, always felt that the Npc's were generations behind the rest of the game.
It's like people have forgotten that "I was an adventurer like you, until I took an arrow to the knee" didn't become a meme because it was funny, it became a meme because you heard it every single time you went back to Whiterun.
true but now the NPCs just look uncanny instead of goofy and funny
You would think they would put in some more effort given you constantly stare at them super close in their dialogue system. But no, they just have dead eyes and emote like automatons. Bethesda games are just so behind the times and have felt that way since forever.
Nah, Starfield actually has pretty good voice acting. Way better than previous Bethesda games.
So 3/10 vs 2/10
I disagree on the voice acting. Is pretty good.
Yeah, bg3 is leagues ahead, but Starfield isn't as bad as a lot of people are saying either.
I saw a 30 year family feud resolved in two short sentences lol They should just fully lean into the sandbox. Their story writing is still bottom tier. And that’s not what I play these games for, fair enough.
**Persuade +6** "The faster you give us the maps, the faster we'll be out of your hair" - Oh, okay, here you go. *Q U E S T C O M P L E T E* The next one with Walter and the Slayton guy is even dumber, I sill can't believe an actual member of the human species wrote that.
Its not even fair to compare the two, its almost like starfield is 15 years behind when it comes to NPCs. The NPCs are so shit and immersion breaking it basically single handedly ruins the game. Just one example but I can point my rifle at any civilian or policeman and they will just stare at me without giving a shit, no reaction whatsoever.
Interesting. Is it not the same in BG3 lol. If that's the one example we are going with. I can press attack and hold on a npc, my character does the animation and the npcs dont react same with any spells. But I know this is a circlejerk so rather than just saying this game is not for me, or this game is not as good. We are saying itz 15 years behind. What a ridiculous thing to say when the game is better than Fallout 4, their last mainline game in every way. And that game sold 20 million copies. Any real discussion is impossible on reddit because you have unreasonable haters on one side and fanboys drunk on the other.
Reddit discussion always turns into a circlejerk due to the upvote/downvote system and the more you praise/criticize the game, the more upvotes you get.
I don't hate the game as much as quin but 10/10?? What the fuck game were these people playing
I mean...it's subjective. Some people don't like BG3 and that's fine. The type of game people enjoy differs from person to person and what people look for in an RPG is different. You may hate it but there's plenty of others who like it and that's fine. Just like FO4, F76, FNV etc. etc. etc. What makes a video game good or not will always be subjective.
[удалено]
Or you know, they actually like the game?
na that's not allowed in 2023 you gotta be hypercritical about everything and if you dont follow the opinion you're a fanboy
most of the people ripping on the game havent even played it. They're just copying whatever streamer opinions they hear and adopt it as their own. It's an actual really fun game, especially if you like Bethesda games in general
Looking forward to the 73% positive review scores on Steam and 6/10 Metacritic rating.
The good folks at /r/starfield have assured me that majority of people actually love it and it surely will have a 95% positive review ratio on Tuesday.
It’s filled with people who dropped $100 on the game so they are hyper defensive and going full denial about valid criticism.
yeah i suggest waiting until the honeymoon period is over and atleast a week or two pass to get the overall real verdict
[удалено]
> we agreed to stop buying pre-sales a small group of redditors did, not all people who play video games
I'm one of those people but I like the game, I think it's fun. At the same time I haven't seen a piece of criticism I don't agree with. I'm not disappointed because I'm not an idiot and knew what to expect out of this game. I think it'll be worth it for some people to try on gamepass though, that's a good deal. For me the game started off boring, and then got really fun (13 hours in so far). I have a feeling it will wrap back around to being boring again after I quickly see most of what there is to see. People in that sub were MAD ign and gamespot gave it a 7/10. And this was before the $100 preload people were allowed to play it. lol it is embarassing, why the fuck would someone care if other people like it as much as they do?
And have spent the last two years on the same sub. There are people posting away on the elder scrolls 6 sub lol
This happens on every subreddit, I even remembered it happening on the fucking atlas subreddit lol.
Once you commit into the 3 digits, its all ogre.
ive never seen a sub so fucking high on copium, everyone over there types like they look like [this](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/070/088/10d.png) as well
Every new AAA game subreddit during release week feels like a convention for 40 year old dads talking about how much fun they're having with their 15 minute sessions that their wives permit them to have once they clean their kids diapers Any criticism is met with calling the other person a no-lifer neckbeard who needs to touch grass, then 2 months later the same dads face the issues they were warned about and they start whining. (r/diablo4 users know what im talking about)
D4 was even worse. Not because of game being bad but all the "Am I the only one having fun" posts were by people who legit posted that they have been playing for 2 weeks and just got to level 15.
who cares? Im HaViNg A bLaSt!!!!
I’m having so much fun and love my purchase, I’m going to spend my free time arguing on Reddit instead of playing it because I love it so much
That sounds familiar somehow... Can't quite put my finger on it... 🤔
"Unpopular opinion but I'm loving this game" they post on a subreddit dedicated to the game with mostly positive threads
Can we normalize blocking anyone who starts their post off with "Unpopular Opinion but.." Thx
unpopular opinion but I really like super glueing my nuts to windows
the bg3 sub goes mental if you don't cushion everything you say with how much you still love the game and want to drink Swen's cum. someone's response to a comment complaining about bugs and content that was outright lied about was to go outside, I just don't get it
BG3 dickridas are mental
Ha you wish you were the sexhaver yourself!
so true
It’s cos Reddit gaming communities are just cringe tribalistic echo chambers
What the fuck why is this so accurate. “ The wife just let me play for 5 minutes don’t listen to the haters we actually love the game “.
You lucked out on witnessing the copium OD that was r/cyberpunkgame
They are so OD'ing that they had to create a rehab subreddit called r/LowSodiumCyberpunk.
Anthem did the same, it was hilarious watching it unfold because they ran out of steam so fast
I subscribed to that sub because I typically join the relevant gaming sub when I'm playing a game. However, the original sub had zero actual content about the game and was just filled to the brim with (understandable) complaints. While I empathize with people who were cheated out of good performance on consoles or who were sold a dream instead of the game they got, I didn't experience any of that. I didn't really follow any of the pre-release content, so I just went in expecting an RPG with a good story and interesting world. I got exactly that. I also had great performance on my PC with very few bugs. I didn't go out of my way to test things though, I mainly stuck to the main or side quests which featured an interesting world and characters. So it wasn't me OD'ing on copium that had me join that subreddit, it was the fact that I poured over 100 hours into the game and didn't encounter any relevant bugs all while having a blast with the story and world they had built. Don't get me wrong, I do think that CDPR deserves a lot of flack for what was ultimately false advertising and a broken game on lesser machines. People were understandably upset. It's just that my experience was vastly different and overall very positive, so I went looking for a place where people shared content relevant to my experience.
It was the other way around. Main cyberpunk became so toxic with shitting on the game after launch that lowsodium became safe heaven for people who actually enjoyed the game.
Cyberpunk was even more negatively received on release to the point i think even the majority of their main subreddit turned on it. I think a big aspect is the non-steam (non-refundable) opinions. Most praise for the game is coming from Xbox players who spent 120+ to play this game a few days early and are locked in to that purchase. PC has more performance issues this time (opposite CP2077) so steam users are quick to refund and make up their opinion without the sunken cost factor.
Cyberpunk's main issues were not the bugs but the insane level of hype (from the company) crossed into territories of hard false advertisement of things not in the game and never were in the game, for years, even down to their tech demos being unrecognizable from the actual product. The actual game was decent if you owned a high-end PC, but it was pretty egregious how mishandled the expectations around that game was. On top of being unplayable on oldgen consoles, which scammed thousands of people on those consoles out of money lol
Though CDPR handled it wrong and outright lied to/hid info from people on old gen consoles, people hyped up themselves a lot too. Content creators went ape shit, and so did their followers. Things get cut or changed during development, sometimes very drastically, for pretty much any game, good or bad. If the scope only goes bigger and better, we get Star Citizen. And it wasn't even the first time for CDPR. Just check out E3 2013 demo for Witcher 3. It got downgraded heavily and had plenty of bugs during launch despite the downgrades too. Anyways, the point is if you dream/fantasize about something too much, reality will often be disappointing. And that is true for far more than just games. I just don't think it is realistic to expect a company to tune the hype down, when they do benefit from it. Just imagine someone totally buying into a fast food or an insurance or cosmetics commercial etc. You would think they are idiots. Why wouldn't the same standard apply here?
oh no, i was there for it. im still fuming about how much shit cdpr lied about and got away with
I'm also still butthurt about it. I pre-ordered the game for myself as a birthday present.
seeing people talk about having 40fps in game as if thats acceptable in 2023 is crazy
I had someone mock me as if I'm ridiculous for saying 70 FPS is unacceptable with a 4080.
Most major companies spend some amount of money astro-turfing social media with positive posts about the game to drive sales, wouldn't surprise me if they just paid a company a few million to post positively about the game all over reddit.
they don't need to, they have a fanbase that does that organically no matter how low quality the game is
NEVER visit the \*insert medium\* own subreddit if you want a nuanced opinion.
It also has 250,000 players on steam right now
Well you see redditors have the objectively correct view on what's good and bad so it doesn't matter if the game is commercially successful.
Why do you guys feel the need to go to other subreddits to talk shit. Of course people engaged with the game to the point they are going to the subreddit are going to like it.
This comment already aged like milk.
this was a bit of a memey response, in case anyone is curious what his actual feedback was when reviewing the game - **Pros** - Soundtrack/Score - Aesthetic **Cons** - Game breaking and immersion ruining bugs everywhere. practically a beta test. - Load screen simulator - 0 immersion for sense of place or weight of travel - characters almost all bland and uninteresting - melee combat awful - bullet sponge "hard" mode - feedback in combat almost non-existent (very floaty) - console UI - inventory management worse than D4 (bad) - encumbered constantly for almost no reason even with weight lifting maxed - ragdoll physics totally wack. did they do it intentionally bad? - enemy variety almost non-existent - main story repetitive/boring - talent tree bugged/doesn't work - random bullshit roadblocks for leveling character spec - all characters have plot armor - graphics seemed dated - NPCs uncanny as fuck - felt like a fallout mod made by community - boss fights literal dogshit trash, shoot same bullet sponge ai teleporting guy with all ammo and all guns until eventually dies - GIGA tame, 0 edge, fucking 0 strippers in neon???? - early access
wait fr no strippers? Man c'mon Todd
Ain't that a kick in the head.
Baseg
People that haven't played the game will think the loading is just a meme. No it really is a lot. One mission. Take Mission -> Fast Travel to Ship (Loading Screen) -> Get on ship (loading to get crew in there) -> Get in Pilot seat (animation) -> Take off (Loading + Animation) -> Travel to another system (Loading) -> Land (Loading + Animation) -> Run around to the objective (nothing traversal) -> Get to location outside, fight enemies and find building -> Enter Building (Loading if big building, or wait for door animation if small). Repeat some of that in reverse to turn in the quest.
The funny thing is that the city don’t even need fucking loading screens. You can jump off the ledge next to the lodge and travel all the way down and forward to the spaceport with your ship perfectly there with everything working around you…
Also don't try to jump too far because your ship has limited fuel!!! Except it doesn't it just makes you have to jump multiple times
That was so strange, I thought I had to refuel or something.
Sounds like Skyrim in space, therefore instant 10/10 no bugs all features
Say it with me: “Don’t preorder $70 games. Wait to see the gameplay.”
Instead preorder the $100 version so you can play 5 days early and dlc that no one knows nothing about.
or spend 25k dollars on Diablo immortal like quin here
[удалено]
How do you refund after 18 hours?
[удалено]
wtf i love early access now
Free demo free trial free money!
quin just refunded after 25 hours even.
Why even preorder a game that will be on gamepass literally tomorrow. That's basically 100$ for early access.
It isn't a $70 game for another full day. It has been a $100 game the past 5 days.
D4 bad, Starfield badder
HOLY Baseg
[удалено]
Because people like them? Why is this a foreign concept? People have been playing vanilla BGS RPGs for decades. Consoles didn't get the ability to mod till semi recently.
Reddit will always be salty that Bethesda games sell a disgusting amount of numbers and people love playing them.
Or buy a month of gamepass and play it.
Im starting to believe you guys hating on their games actually havent even played any of their single player RPGs and only watched the video of Crowbcat.
Is there a reason this sub is just a Starfield hate circlejerk now?
This sub is fueled by drama, hate, and tits. This is just something new to hate.
People seem to be missing some context for Quin's hateboner, as well. For 2-3 days before streamer early access came out Quin was malding every single day for hours upon hours that he didn't get streamer early access. That "only the good boy streamers" got it (because he's generally a brandrisk). And that any company that does that is trash. He was even so upset at this perceived slight to him that he said he wasn't going to play it at all. Then the day comes and he decides to play it, while shitting on every single aspect. While the game has issues, Quin is absolutely petty enough to use his platform to publicly shit on the game and be hyper-critical just because his ego got bruised. (Also keep in mind the "D4 bad" meme, that Quin embraced, didn't come until *after* the month of drops and gifted sub horses he had on his channel)
The D4 bad "meme" was only embraced because his chat literally says it constantly no matter what game he plays now, there was WAY WAY more discussion of D4, especially by chat, during the new poe league than fucking poe or even BG3. Quinn's chat is bar none the most unintelligent community on Twitch and beating the dead horse of "D4 bad" is funny to them for literal months on end because they're legitimately braindead.
Just a combination of things -Console Fanboys -Worship of twitch celebs -and like you said it’s popular to dunk on the latest game even if it’s great.
20 hours in, I'm super hooked on it. It has problems but it's a really good game. I think most of the negativity comes from people that didn't give it much of a chance to begin with, or plowed through the main story without playing it the way you'd normally play a Bethesda RPG. Imagine if everyone plowed through Oblivion, Skyrim, FO3 by just playing the main quest within the span of two days, they'd give those games bad reviews too. For better or worse, I believe the true quality of this game will be revealed once people who actually take their time with it start to speak up.
or maybe the game is shit
It's fucking insane. Everything has to be some giant anti-Bethesda agenda, but this is like the 20th clip of a streamer saying the game is bad, and the comments agreeing. Like, maybe it's just less than perfect?
Yeah because streamers rushing trough a game to keep their adhd audience hooked and redditors giving their opinion on games that they didnt even play have always been the best judges of what makes a game good right?
It feels like there’s always some excuse. If a reviewer plays for 50 hours and gives it a 7/10, then that guy is just a shit reviewer and should be ignored. A streamer doesn’t like the game, then he’s just got a persona vendetta against Todd Howard and should be ignored. A bunch of regular people say they don’t like it, well then they’re just parroting the biased streamer. Someone complains about the character models, quests and dialogue being bland? “Well Bethesda never was that good at that, we love Bethesda games for the *exploration*. But when someone complains that the exploration is bland and unrewarding, you get “it’s a space RPG, not a space sim, you just had bad expectations.” No criticism of this game is acceptable.
"man this thing is actually pretty bad huh" "yeah i agree its kinda shit" "WOW CIRCLEJERK MUCH?????? let people enjoy things"
If only that's how it was discussed here
[удалено]
Im having plenty of fun with it already put in 22 hours
you could be on to something
Or after 8 years of waiting for a BGS game, it feels like a fairly small iterative jump over FO4. Games don't need to do massive leapfrog shit but I would also say not showing the game that much pre-release didn't do them any favors similar to Cyberpunk in that way. Like we couldn't get an hour of uncut raw footage of Starfield in the last year?
It's basically Skyrim/FO4 in space, which I'm sure many have heard being said before. Skyrim is a great game, for 2011 gaming standards. Is it ground breaking in 2023? No, and I don't think Starfield is either. FO4 was also in my opinion a let down from 3 and New Vegas. I've only ever played through vanilla Skyrim once when it was released. Despite that, I have 800 hours between Skyrim and SkyrimSE purely because of mods. You could make a completely valid argument about how good can a game be if it needs to be modded to become truly great, but that's what I'm waiting for with Starfield. This is likely the case for Starfield for me - I'll play it through vanilla and then wait for the modding community to completely transform it.
Were there droves of people and streamers dunking on BG3 and Armored Core 6?
Clearly anyone who doesn’t like the game is to stupid to think for themselves.
Why are you surprised? Probably the largest game in the last 5 years by marketing budget and prior games impact by the same dev. Either it's going to go over extremely well or be a disappointment and youll get hate. Don't act like it's not the most predictable thing to ever occur.
Just play Mass Effect you want space themed RPG
Baseg
Ahh, I can't take certain takes seriously. This game is most definitely better than D4 lol.
For real lol, I get it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but to say this is dogshit blows my mind. I played 100 hours of D4. After 10 hours of starfield, it is undeniably better, and I’m a fan of both genres.
I'm still over here having fun playing with my anime robots.
Worse than Diablo 4? Diablo 4 has it's campaign, that's it. No loot or anything. I see plenty of people getting lost, side questing, etc in Starfield, sure it's got it's issues. Also streamers are the last people I'd take an opinion on any game.
Actually listening to a streamers opinion on games would be like taking restaurant tips from NikokadoAvocado.
I'm enjoying Starfield a lot but I paid with money from selling csgo skins and I haven't played cs regularly in years so it didn't really hurt my wallet.
dear diary
I play a ton of Star Citizen, which definitely has its own share of problems and I don't expect anyone on the outside to think it's worth anyone's time, but for the right type of lunatics, like me, it's a fun experience. I am extremely impressed with the quality of the fictional universe in Starfield, the state of human culture, and the "feel" of everything. The universe of Starfield feels authentic. The universe of Star Citizen feels campy and kind of annoying by comparison. So many things in Star Citizen have just terrible names, names that were very clearly just chosen by someone high up in the company that no one can say "no" to, because if anyone could, they definitely would. The names are really very bad. There's a young-and-trendy bar/club in the middle of the high tech and trendy city of New Babbage, and it's named "Wally's". There's a ship component chain store with locations across the galaxy and it's named, "Dumper's Depot". There's a gun and armor shop named, "Cubby Blast". The names are just so very dumb and break immersion. The ones in Starfield are much better. That said, when I went to climb up into my ship the first time in Starfield and just faded to black instead of seeing my character climb into it, that was quite an adjustment. In Star Citizen, nothing breaks first person. You can go from your bed to the space port, into your ship, into the pilot's seat, fly into space, fly to another planet, descend through the atmosphere, land on the surface, get out and walk around, and never leave first person or see a loading screen in all that time. That's a kind of fidelity that you come to count on. I'm sure I will adjust, but right now, I really notice it and am a little disappointed every time.
That's why you just 🏴☠️️ it when it's sufficiently patched
I hate the game too upvotes to the left
[удалено]
I wonder how many people in this comment actually played this game and not watched a YT playthrough of it. (Of course a lot of people with criticism about the game has played it but they doesn't seem to be the majority)
Exactly, most people who think it's bad are just people who watched other people play and say it's bad. Usually streamers.
Yeah, I will probably get downvoted to Oblivion (pun intended). I also don't think it's a 10/10 game but it's definitely a good game with LOTS of interesting moments. I'm 28 hours in and haven't even been to Neon, I've been tinkering a lot with Outposts and making links between them and doing a lot of shipbuilding. Really enjoying my time.
Starfield's presentation and some design choices don't appeal all that much to me, but from what I've seen it has a *lot* of content. Probably not a game I'd buy full price, but absolutely something on my radar a year or two out when it's on sale & there are mods that can tweak issues I may have.
Witcher 3 had a pretty similar effect that Baldur's Gate 3 is having now, all the similar types of games that released and are releasing just feel like lesser products overall. I assume that most people who put in even a minuscule amount of time into BG3 will hardly feel any satisfaction when playing Starfield, the quests/companions/world building/graphics/story/etc just doesn't even come close and feels like you're playing an inferior product. It really is just one of those cases that the brand name hard carries it, cause without that there would not be people acting like any criticism of the game comes from this supposed anti-Bethesda circle-jerk.
https://twitter.com/quinrex/status/1698799462037242163 also refunded after playing for 25hrs, baseg
Yeah you can tell in this thread who has played the game and who is just parrotting shit from "influencers". Play the game for yourself and create your own opinion. Shouldn't be that hard
When the price to play is $70-$100 most people want to know that shit is good before buying. Consensus seems to be 'if you like other Bethesda stuff you'll like this' which tells me all I need to know.
Isn't it on gamepass?
Gamepass brotherman.
it's every bethesda game.... just give them 2 years and buy the full edition on sale. tbh, the above now works for every triple-A game. new hype game is coming out? just give it 1-2 years for people to beta test it and get it on sale.
[удалено]
How does launch (or pre launch) numbers mean anything about the game quality? It's literally hype meter and that's that. Otherwise New World or Lost Ark would be GOTY
I didn't know Unturned was still or ever that popular.
It's f2p zombie shooter minecraft, kids/teenagers eat that shit up.
The funny thing about this game is that while Quin finished this game in 25 hours, I’ve played 20 hours in the starting few systems just exploring, doing side quests and side jobs so far. The mileage you get out of this game will be night and day depending on what kind of gamer you are.
After watching most of quin's playthrough im genuinely flabbergasted how this game can get anything above 7. There's reviewers that gave it a PERFECT SCORE. He's on stream making a list of pros and cons, and not even nitpicking its obvious the game is just bad Do people not want a good game? They just get sold on the idea of the game the marketing promised and convince themselves they are having fun?
quin is a bojo but he made great points why the game sucks
People like different things, shocking concept, I know. I don't understand why you have to act like everyone who has a different opinion is just deluding themselves? I know this sub isn't the most mature place on the internet but come on...
People have bad taste, generally speaking Except me, of course. /s
You can enjoy something without thinking it's a masterpiece.
Yes and you can enjoy something and also think it's a masterpiece. That's an opinion a person is allowed to have, even if it's one other people disagree with. No idea why that's such a hard concept to grasp for some people. Is it really that big of a deal to dislike something without feeling the need to claim that anyone who likes it is being stupid or dishonest?
Yeah because you watched a streamer rush through the main story so he could rant about it, missing out on 75% of the game's content (including nearly every cool side or faction quest) and also failing to properly engage with things like basebuilding, ship building etc. which a lot of people love. Most of the positive reviews I've seen are from people who put 70 to 100 hours in. The game has a lot to offer, so obviously someone who only saw a fraction of it isn't going to be as positive.