Not to mention CD Projekt Red released a deep dive video a few months out from Cyberpunk's release, which completely misrepresented the final game.Famous last words
I hope the game is good (I don't think I've ever hoped a game is bad) but this is very much a "wait and see"
Agreed for the most part, but Paul Tassi is the exception IMOI'm sure Starfield will be awesome, but I can't take anything Forbes says seriously. They have some of the worst takes.
Until it's surpassed by GTA 6Going to surpass RDR2 as one of the greatest achievements by mankind.
I'm sure Starfield will be awesome, but I can't take anything Forbes says seriously. They have some of the worst takes.
Paul is like the only Forbes contributor to speak of though lol. He often posts wild takes
Why do people act like they make bad games? Skyrim is the best selling single player game of all time and is one of the highest rated games of all time. Fallout 4 was a commercial and critical success and won more GOTYs than Bloodborne.
They are the premier RPG studio in this industry and no other studio has come close to making the type of games they do.
I think the thing for me, to understand. The big questions that still leave me uncertain on this game are as follows...
I'm absolutely not saying that the game is bad or that we shouldn't anticipate it, but I think that these are things that we can't see from the showcase reveals. I'm hopeful that the game provides interesting and positive answers to all of those questions, but I'm also not able to jump to conclusions until I'm able to play it. I'm very cautiously optimistic.
- How did they successfully test the technical quality of a game of this scale with so many intersecting and procedural elements?
- How did they balance a game so complex across such a wide range of different scenarios?
- How did they assure the quality of the experience across such a wide range of space and scenarios?
- How did they manage the balance between vastly expanding the playable space, and narrative density?
This game is going to be 5-6 big cities, 15-20 small settlements, and 990 empty planets. Stay tuned for the 1st expansion though!
Like I said later, you can dislike BGS games all you want, that's totally fine. It's the whole Bethesda makes bad games, or BGS game launches are awful that doesn't make sense. You can hate their games, but don't act like your opinion is the general consensus.There's people who love Bethesda RPGs and then there are RPG fans that try to get into Bethesda RPGs and bump up against their shallow RPG elements, floaty combat and non-existent emergent gameplay. It's been this same song and dance since Oblivion. Maybe Starfield will break this cycle and unite all fans of open world RPGs but I doubt any kind of glowing praise from previews is enough to dispel the cynicism you see from those critical of Bethesda's recent output.
That BGS makes some of the biggest open world games going
That's fair, I can't say I've seen everything he posts. I always assumed I only ever noticed him because I was only paying attention to the good Forbes articlesPaul is like the only Forbes contributor to speak of though lol. He often posts wild takes
I was gonna assume "Don't doubt Todd and the team at Rockville"
'Only' 5-6 major cities sounds fair but many more settlements and a lot of ouposts dotted around most planets I would imagine. There's only so much they can craft by hand after all but I would be surprised if there isn't some settlement/outpost-like content within the procedural generation.This game is going to be 5-6 big cities, 15-20 small settlements, and 990 empty planets. Stay tuned for the 1st expansion though!
That's 5-6 more cities, 15-20 small more settlements and 999 more planets than last year's RPG of the year Elden Ring. Sounds good to me.This game is going to be 5-6 big cities, 15-20 small settlements, and 990 empty planets. Stay tuned for the 1st expansion though!
Like I said later, you can dislike BGS games all you want, that's totally fine. It's the whole Bethesda makes bad games, or BGS game launches are awful that doesn't make sense. You can hate their games, but don't act like your opinion is the general consensus.
Starfield threads always bring in the exact same copy and paste negative comments that try to downplay the studio and their games, it's weird as hell. If you don't like BGS games you don't have to enter a Starfield thread and act like your opinion speaks for the mass market because it demonstrably doesn't.
There is a difference between cynicism and just plain old negativity.
You posted a few months back that Starfield's gameplay looks straight up bad and that you had zero hype for the game.
I think your issue with this title may run deeper than the points you are trying to make here.
This is solved. It was a RAM and storage issue on PS3/360 gen consoles.The PS3 had 256mb of total RAM which was lol for sure. For reference, 2005 Oblivion on PC asks for 512mb system RAM, 128mb VRAM (so 640mb split RAM). Skyrim, which was more modern and came out 6 years later, had less than half that to work with. It's a miracle those games ran on those consoles at all.I really hope they solved the way all their games start to slow down and chug after playing for 100 hours, because the game needs to keep track of all the things you've done. Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout, they all don't run as smooth as the beginning hours of playing, when the game has to track all the items you've dropped in the world and choices you've made.
In Starfield, I'm curious to see how the game runs after you've placed and decorated your bases, and dropped all those sandwiches & things in the world.
I'm also curious to see how quickly the worlds and activities and procedural quests begin to feel repetitive.
That despite the hype this game is going to ship broken and busted just like all other recent insanely ambitious open world games. This isn't my opinion, it's just the most likely outcome given previous events. Even more so considering BGS's track record.
Zenimax/Bethesda does not = BGS. BGS is TES and Fallout. People who can make the distinction are excited for the next big game from the team who made those games.Wait, this isn't even a hands-on, but rather just based off the showcase?
Like, this is the same Zenimax/Bethesda that just published Redfall, right? I admit that was a great presentation, but, I remain shocked at how quickly people still fall for this company's marketing and PR.
76. ES6 does have a team working on it based on rumors.
Could be. But it takes like a small team of mostly software engineers to handle proc-gen (isn't Hello Games like 10 people?) and an army of modellers and artists to handcraft cities & settlements, so it's not like having those 990 "empty" planets is taking away from anything either way.This game is going to be 5-6 big cities, 15-20 small settlements, and 990 empty planets. Stay tuned for the 1st expansion though!
This game is going to be 5-6 big cities, 15-20 small settlements, and 990 empty planets. Stay tuned for the 1st expansion though!
And a really big box for its time
I mean they're not, but the others I know of are traditional roguelikes. Depends on what you mean by scale, I mean they're huge and awesome but not 3DThey're the only ones doing such simulationist RPGs, or at least on such a scale.
But Bethesda games aren't roguelikes...I mean they're not, but the others I know of are traditional roguelikes. Depends on what you mean by scale, I mean they're huge and awesome but not 3D
No, but you said simulationist RPGs, and a game like Caves of Qud reminds me of TES in a lot of ways, except the setting is somehow much more insane and the writing is exceptionally good
Zenimax/Bethesda does not = BGS. BGS is TES and Fallout. People who can make the distinction are excited for the next big game from the team who made those games.
I'd feel differently if it was just Todd out there with a prototype talking about things the game could do, but they did a lot of showing, not telling, in the showcase, which goes a lot further with me. We're 3 months from release, not 3 years. They can't exactly bullshit systems when release is imminent.Bethesda Softworks does the marketing for all of their studios. I'm not saying the game won't be great, but I am saying to never fully believe this marketing team.
This isn't some wild take, it did look bad.You posted a few months back that Starfield's gameplay looks straight up bad and that you had zero hype for the game.
I think your issue with this title may run deeper than the points you are trying to make here.
Didn't know you already played the game. This thinly veiled stuff is so transparent.This game is going to be 5-6 big cities, 15-20 small settlements, and 990 empty planets. Stay tuned for the 1st expansion though!
That's fair, I can't say I've seen everything he posts. I always assumed I only ever noticed him because I was only paying attention to the good Forbes articles
I really think it's because the showcase just had so much actual gameplay and went into such great depth. But you're right, no one does a game presentation like Bethesda.Wait, this isn't even a hands-on, but rather just based off the showcase?
Like, this is the same Zenimax/Bethesda that just published Redfall, right? I admit that was a great presentation, but, I remain shocked at how quickly people still fall for this company's marketing and PR.
At no point did Bethesda manage to convince people that Redfall would be a good game. Most people that thought it would be good were basing that entirely off of Arkane's history of making fantastic games. But gameplay video after gameplay video was disappointing as hell.Wait, this isn't even a hands-on, but rather just based off the showcase?
Like, this is the same Zenimax/Bethesda that just published Redfall, right? I admit that was a great presentation, but, I remain shocked at how quickly people still fall for this company's marketing and PR.
The big thing with Starfield, at least for me, is that while it appears to have the resource collecting of No Man's Sky, it also has that Fallout/Elder Scrolls dungeon crawling with some solid first-person combat and looting actual meaningful things. Also leveling up and skill trees and all that.I'm guessing it'll feel like a polished Fallout 4 in the gameplay, with procgen planets, and space combat/ship stuff in the middle.
I just hope they have more choice and consequences. I disliked that so much after loving new vegas and going to 4, the combat was better in 4, but the rpg part took such a step back.
And on paper no man's sky sounds cool, but I just can't get into it…. Every new release for awhile Id restart and I just disliked the inventory ui, and mining the minerals/ship repair.
I'm guessing I'll enjoy starfields more since it's a standard style bgs game.
There's been like 6-7 responses to his crappy, uninformed take and he hasn't come back to reply. Quite sure it was a drive-by.Didn't know you already played the game. This thinly veiled stuff is so transparent.
R* and Bethesda are the reasons why every AAA game seems to be an open world RPG (or at least an open world game with varying degrees of RPG elements).