Forbes Contributor: "I Don’t Even Understand How ‘Starfield’ Exists"

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

It is amusing how upset some people are getting because Starfield is good.

People are allowed to be impressed with what it appears Bethesda has pulled off. Part of the reason people are losing their minds is because they didn't think it would come together like this after previous showings. The differences from a year ago are pretty dramatic in both visuals and gameplay. And now that we see all the things you can do in this game on top of that, it's just impressive. People dismissing it with takes in here such as "it's industry standard" is laughable.

Click to shrink...

This. The investment some people have in downplaying Starfield since the direct reeks of desperation. They are hoping it fails. Which is pretty sad.

And it sure didn't stop a loud chorus of voices from shitting all over the game with their speculation and hypothesis after the first look that was shown off last year.

 

[Precious Tritium]

People are going to find a way to overhyped this aren't they.

 

[魑魅魍魎]

IGN's hands-on impressions likened it "NMS with a full Bethesda RPG built on top of it, what you would expect a NMS 2 to be." Was most impressed by the space combat actually being good.

Highly recommend everyone watch the IGN video.

Click to shrink...

I will watch that video. I am hoping the game is more like NMS and less like skyrim/fallout

 

[Saucycarpdog]

What's with the passive aggressiveness cause people are excited about this game?

Platform wars are a hell of a drug

 

[Iucidium]

lol no man's sky was the same. No need to overhype things. There's still a chance Bethesda mess up.

Click to shrink...

Looking forward to the deepdives on the game. I hope it isn't all smoke and mirrors.

 

[SupersonicHypertonic]

I mean unless there's a wildly different implementation Starfield isn't exactly something unheard of or brand new. Mass effect in the 2000s basically did the same thing of traveling to specific planets within a RPG setting. No man's sky has more space exploration allowing travel to pretty much every planet.

As for being amazing because it's coming in 3 months. Lol. This writers an idiot. Games are developed years in advance and of course show them off them near release. TOTK had gameplay previews about a month before release and that was in development for 6 years.

 

[fontguy]

I think Tassi actually has more latitude than most of their writers.

Click to shrink...

Because he has a little "This ain't us!" disclaimer next to his title, even on articles that are ostensibly just news.

He is the cornerstone of their game coverage.

Click to shrink...

In the same way Pewdiepie is the cornerstone of YouTube's game coverage.

 

[Alek]

I really don't see how what they're doing is all that crazy? It's like No Man's Sky with more narrative and curation?

Like if you took No Man's Sky and instead of 1,000,000,000,000 planets, you said, what if we just took 1000 of the most unique ones and wove a narrative around that? Then that's Star Field. It's a different approach but it's not hard to imagine how you'd get there from No Man's Sky's blueprint.

And I also think people are getting a little ahead of themselves. Whether the narrative will be good, whether the activities will be in-depth, and whatnot, all remains to be seen. If you look at Cyberpunk as an example, it looked like this hyperdetailed game with these intricate skill trees and clever narrative that's interwoven into a living, breathing city...

But then you played cyberpunk, and realised that none of the skill progression really matters because the world isn't well-designed to support it. Enemies feel almost randomly placed, the city's design is purely aesthetic and the systemic gameplay elements are simply smoke and mirrors.

I think that will be the challenge with Starfield and we will see if they've achieved what they set out to, realistically only when people get to play it.

 

[DJwest]

I have it slightly below RDR2:

1. Fire
2. Medicine
3. RDR2
4. Starfield
5. The Pyramids
...

Click to shrink...

Lmaooo

 

[Tyche-42]

I mean unless there's a wildly different implementation Starfield isn't exactly something unheard of or brand new. Mass effect in the 2000s basically did the same thing of traveling to specific planets within a RPG setting. No man's sky has more space exploration allowing travel to pretty much every planet.

As for being amazing because it's coming in 3 months. Lol. This writers an idiot. Games are developed years in advance and of course show them off them near release. TOTK had gameplay previews about a month before release and that was in development for 6 years.

Click to shrink...

none of the mechanics are unheard of, having all of them in a single game is whats impressive. Entire planets that are proc gen but all look incredible and have lighting/graphical features we've only seen in games like RDR2/HFW like long distant mist/fog, except they also have handmade flora/fauna and have been designed to be generated a certain way with specific biomes.

the ability to land anywhere on a planet and explore, but with handmade content being placed dyanamically along your path so youre not just wandering through empty wilderness for hours.

The ability to build a completely custom ship, with an interior, hire a crew to run it, and fly it around space while trading, bounty hunting, and even boarding ships which you can then rob.

The ability to build colonies almost anywhere and staff it with crew or followers.

Multiple factions and large handmade cities each with a completely different theme based on popular sci-fi tropes like Militaristic federation, Space western, and Cyberpunk. All with handmade quests, NPCs, locations etc.

and on top of all of this an entire BGS RPG with decent looking combat, quests, RPG systems, all the interactive systems that make their games unique, and more handmade content than any of their previous games.

So yeah, if you look at the individual parts its all been 'done' but never all in one game and often not to the quality seen here. Like the proc gen terrain in this game blows any game using proc gen out of the water. Hell it blows most games with handmade environments out of the water.

 

[Felpsmbs]

I mean unless there's a wildly different implementation Starfield isn't exactly something unheard of or brand new. Mass effect in the 2000s basically did the same thing of traveling to specific planets within a RPG setting. No man's sky has more space exploration allowing travel to pretty much every planet.

As for being amazing because it's coming in 3 months. Lol. This writers an idiot. Games are developed years in advance and of course show them off them near release. TOTK had gameplay previews about a month before release and that was in development for 6 years.

Click to shrink...

Do we really need to start insulting people here?

 

[ultraluna]

i think they used computers to make it

Click to shrink...

how many

 

[Darkmaigle]

"Look on my works and despair"

-Todd

 

[mrmickfran]

i think they used computers to make it

Click to shrink...

 

[HBK]

I think the specific implementation of fast travel is massively destructive to the fantasy of a game like Skyrim. You can't feel like you're on a grand adventure in the wilderness when you're a zero cost, no strings attached loading screen away from complete safety.

In Starfield I want to feel the isolation and danger of being millions of miles from the nearest outpost. They gotta have changed something about fast travel for that to be possible.

Click to shrink...

Agreed. We'll see.

 

[Forsaken82]

The scale is great but if the gameplay loop is boring it wont matter how big the game is.

Click to shrink...

The Gameplay Loop seems almost identical to an Elder Scrolls game... it's catering to that crowd and the Mass Effect crowd simultaneously. I think this game will do just fine.

 

[Aiqops]

The scale is great but if the gameplay loop is boring it wont matter how big the game is.

Click to shrink...

Tell that to the massive ips like Elder Scrolls and Fallout.

 

[ProbablyRobbie]

Rumor is Todd Howard, while on a hike found a solid black monolith, its only feature was a USB C port. When he plugged it into his macbook Starfield was born.

 

[Babu93]

I think one of the most exciting things is that if it truly is a major success, I think they can keep building on it in a way they haven't been able to do before.

There have been plenty of good expansions to their previous games, but I always think it feels a bit contrived travelling to some new smaller area outside the main map. But here, you could seamlessly add new planets or even new reachable systems with new content.

 

[HBK]

I really don't see how what they're doing is all that crazy? It's like No Man's Sky with more narrative and curation?

Like if you took No Man's Sky and instead of 1,000,000,000,000 planets, you said, what if we just took 1000 of the most unique ones and wove a narrative around that? Then that's Star Field. It's a different approach but it's not hard to imagine how you'd get there from No Man's Sky's blueprint.

And I also think people are getting a little ahead of themselves. Whether the narrative will be good, whether the activities will be in-depth, and whatnot, all remains to be seen. If you look at Cyberpunk as an example, it looked like this hyperdetailed game with these intricate skill trees and clever narrative that's interwoven into a living, breathing city...

But then you played cyberpunk, and realised that none of the skill progression really matters because the world isn't well-designed to support it. Enemies feel almost randomly placed, the city's design is purely aesthetic and the systemic gameplay elements are simply smoke and mirrors.

I think that will be the challenge with Starfield and we will see if they've achieved what they set out to, realistically only when people get to play it.

Click to shrink...

There was nothing in Skyrim that was unheard of at the time. Yet the only game that mimics it is Fallout 4. BGS games are unique in how their take on simulating worlds though scripts and unreasonable amounts of fluff provides a « life simulation » experience.

 

[SupersonicHypertonic]

none of the mechanics are unheard of, having all of them in a single game is whats impressive. Entire planets that are proc gen but all look incredible and have lighting/graphical features we've only seen in games like RDR2/HFW like long distant mist/fog, except they also have handmade flora/fauna and have been designed to be generated a certain way with specific biomes.

the ability to land anywhere on a planet and explore, but with handmade content being placed dyanamically along your path so youre not just wandering through empty wilderness for hours.

The ability to build a completely custom ship, with an interior, hire a crew to run it, and fly it around space while trading, bounty hunting, and even boarding ships which you can then rob.

The ability to build colonies almost anywhere and staff it with crew or followers.

Multiple factions and large handmade cities each with a completely different theme based on popular sci-fi tropes like Militaristic federation, Space western, and Cyberpunk. All with handmade quests, NPCs, locations etc.

and on top of all of this an entire BGS RPG with decent looking combat, quests, RPG systems, all the interactive systems that make their games unique, and more handmade content than any of their previous games.

So yeah, if you look at the individual parts its all been 'done' but never all in one game and often not to the quality seen here. Like the proc gen terrain in this game blows any game using proc gen out of the water. Hell it blows most games with handmade environments out of the water.

Click to shrink...

Yeah I get having an those things in 1 game is great and all but we've seen most of those things already in other games including Bethesda own games like elder Scrolls or fallout with their branched narratives, factions and RPG play style.

Mass effect did space exploring worlds with some hand made quests years ago, probably another game did it before, and it had planet specific landscape, gravity, minerals etc. Obviously not to this degree but those elements were already there and wowing people back then (and making them hate it because of the Mako lol).

As for the procedure generated stuff we will have to wait and see for that. It could be another nms where what the game creates is blander than what the creators promised. If planet X is a habitable forest world and settlers use I don't know a wood logging plant and cowboy aesthetic but planet Y is an inhospitable desert world and the settlers use the same equipment and style then it's obviously going to look out of place and immersion breaking. Making a galaxy of planets means there somehow Bethesda needs to differentiate each and every one otherwise it's back to being NMS or mass effect were a lot of the planets are surprisingly similar despite being light years apart with different stars, gravity wells or planet constitutions.

 

[Soda]

This has "The only thing I don't like about it is that it's almost too good" meme vibes.

 

[diakyu]

It's hard to get excited about anything big nowadays, especially developers with a dubious track record recently like Bethesda, but I want it to be good. I want it to be fantastic actually, but I'll have to wait till close to release

 

[魑魅魍魎]

i think they used computers to make it

Click to shrink...

Doubt it unless they had access to quantum computers from 2099

 

[Bengraven]

They had to get so many tubes together to send files through the world wide web, then use bleach to clean them after the game goes gold so it doesn't leak.

 

[Tyche-42]

Yeah I get having an those things in 1 game is great and all but we've seen most of those things already in other games including Bethesda own games like elder Scrolls or fallout with their branched narratives, factions and RPG play style.

Mass effect did space exploring worlds with some hand made quests years ago, probably another game did it before, and it had planet specific landscape, gravity, minerals etc. Obviously not to this degree but those elements were already there and wowing people back then (and making them hate it because of the Mako lol).

As for the procedure generated stuff we will have to wait and see for that. It could be another nms where what the game creates is blander than what the creators promised. If planet X is a habitable forest world and settlers use I don't know a wood logging plant and cowboy aesthetic but planet Y is an inhospitable desert world and the settlers use the same equipment and style then it's obviously going to look out of place and immersion breaking. Making a galaxy of planets means there somehow Bethesda needs to differentiate each and every one otherwise it's back to being NMS or mass effect were a lot of the planets are surprisingly similar despite being light years apart with different stars, gravity wells or planet constitutions.

Click to shrink...

Yeah im sorry but at the end of the day if youre trying to say that theres no difference between ME1's planets and what they showed here then i just think youre being disengenious.

 

[Trunchisholm]

I really don't see how what they're doing is all that crazy? It's like No Man's Sky with more narrative and curation?

Like if you took No Man's Sky and instead of 1,000,000,000,000 planets, you said, what if we just took 1000 of the most unique ones and wove a narrative around that? Then that's Star Field. It's a different approach but it's not hard to imagine how you'd get there from No Man's Sky's blueprint.

And I also think people are getting a little ahead of themselves. Whether the narrative will be good, whether the activities will be in-depth, and whatnot, all remains to be seen. If you look at Cyberpunk as an example, it looked like this hyperdetailed game with these intricate skill trees and clever narrative that's interwoven into a living, breathing city...

But then you played cyberpunk, and realised that none of the skill progression really matters because the world isn't well-designed to support it. Enemies feel almost randomly placed, the city's design is purely aesthetic and the systemic gameplay elements are simply smoke and mirrors.

I think that will be the challenge with Starfield and we will see if they've achieved what they set out to, realistically only when people get to play it.

Click to shrink...

This sounds like you haven't played a single BGS game. Their games are a unique flavour. No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk scratch completely different itches.

It's hard to get excited about anything big nowadays, especially developers with a dubious track record recently like Bethesda, but I want it to be good. I want it to be fantastic actually, but I'll have to wait till close to release

Click to shrink...

BGS doesn't have a dubious track record. They've released banger after banger. I think you might be referring to Arcane Austin.

 

[Kabuki Waq]

It's the same Bethesda cycle. Trailers and Ambition always wow and then the game releases.........

 

[Kittenz]

I'll never understand how Bethesda gets so much skepticism and hate. The last two games sold a combined 100 million copies and are still loved and played heavily years and years later.

At some point people need to see a difference between "this game isn't for me" and "Bethesda is unreliable trash."

 

[Tyche-42]

It's the same Bethesda cycle. Trailers and Ambition always wow and then the game releases.........

Click to shrink...

They released 1 bad game, its hardly a cycle.

 

[JohnnyToonami]

Game looks good but the article is sounds like fanboy wank. It's just a video game, it's not hard to understand.

 

[SupersonicHypertonic]

Yeah im sorry but at the end of the day if youre trying to say that theres no difference between ME1's planets and what they showed here then i just think youre being disengenious.

Click to shrink...

In not. I already said the base elements and gameplay of planet hopping was done before, it's not something unbelievable like the article was making out to be. SF adding the usual Bethesda scope and depth on top doesn't drastically change it for what it is

 

[Kabuki Waq]

They released 1 bad game, its hardly a cycle.

Click to shrink...

Their ambition is always let down by their execution. Do you guys remember skyrim launch? Oblivion? Garbage AI bugs etc etc. Still fun games but nowhere near what they were sold as.

 

[Yoga Flame]

It's the same Bethesda cycle. Trailers and Ambition always wow and then the game releases.........

Click to shrink...

Oblivion -> Fallout 3 -> Skyrim -> Fallout 4

That's one incredible string of games from BGS, with only Fallout 4 not achieving the brilliance of prior games. So they have a history of delivering great games, the hype comes from that.

 

[Garulon]

As for the procedure generated stuff we will have to wait and see for that. It could be another nms where what the game creates is blander than what the creators promised.

Click to shrink...

This is counting from Oblivion Bethesda's sixth game using procedural generation for terrain. I think by now they know what they're doing.

 

[Soapbox Killer]

I don't get why this game seems to be so polarizing? I might be missing something (I often am)?


Starfield |OT| No Man's Skyrim

(This joke has had to already been made right?)

 

[HBK]

BGS doesn't have a dubious track record. They've released banger after banger. I think you might be referring to Arcane Austin.

Click to shrink...

Arguably 76 was a rough release. But otherwise yeah, they know their shit.

 

[Stibbs]

I think it's made by higher dimension beings who beamed it from the future, straight into Todd's PC in-exchange for one of his jackets.

Click to shrink...

So thats why Todd didn't have the jacket this time

 

[Strat]

It's the same Bethesda cycle. Trailers and Ambition always wow and then the game releases.........

Click to shrink...

And people love it and play it for a decade? Sure. Yeah.

 

[bes.gen]

im hyped as well but stuff like this gives that fanboyish "almost too good" vibe,
which will naturally irk people. burned too many times.

 

[Mobius and Pet Octopus]

I feel like this game might be getting overhyped.

I love everything I've seen so far.

But they never do show off the the weak points of the gameplay. They'll let people's imagination fill it in.

I wonder about vehicles and intra-planetary travel. If I am stuck walking/running around it might be kinda lame.

 

[LegalEagleMike]

Their ambition is always let down by their execution. Do you guys remember skyrim launch? Oblivion? Garbage AI bugs etc etc. Still fun games but nowhere near what they were sold as.

Click to shrink...

Games of the year?

 

[HBK]

I don't get why this game seems to be so polarizing? I might be missing something (I often am)?

Click to shrink...

Some people just hate BGS games for some reason. It's probably the « why do these games sell so well when I don't like them ».

And of course, the elephant in the room: console wars.

 

[Kaiken]

The hype for this game is unreal. I really hope it does well.

 

[FrakEarth]

I have it slightly below RDR2:

1. Fire
2. Medicine
3. RDR2
4. Starfield
5. The Pyramids
...

Click to shrink...

Not to get all list wars on you, but how is the wheel not top 5!

 

[Lobster Roll]

Their ambition is always let down by their execution. Do you guys remember skyrim launch? Oblivion? Garbage AI bugs etc etc. Still fun games but nowhere near what they were sold as.

Click to shrink...

I do remember Skyrim being hyped and then being one of the coolest gaming experiences of my life that I dipped into time & time & time again. With and without mods.

 

[Necromanti]

I don't get why this game seems to be so polarizing? I might be missing something (I often am)?


Starfield |OT| No Man's Skyrim

(This joke has had to already been made right?)

Click to shrink...

It's absolutely not. It's one of the most anticipated games on this forum. You just have loud minorities playing a tug of war between two ridiculous extremes in the name of childish console war nonsense.

 

[Jombie]

I think the game should actually be out before we start in with the hyperbole.

 

[Kabuki Waq]

Like I said always good games but never close to how they were sold as. Backwards flying dragons.... NPCs that don't acknowledge you when you kill their God. Awful AI in general really hurts them and Jank is there. Remember ps3 version of skyrim?

 

[HBK]

Oblivion -> Fallout 3 -> Skyrim -> Fallout 4

That's one incredible string of games from BGS, with only Fallout 4 not achieving the brilliance of prior games. So they have a history of delivering great games, the hype comes from that.

Click to shrink...

And even Fallout 4 was far from a bad game. It just didn't achieve the otherworldly greatness of Skyrim.