Starfield - May Update Out Now! (New Difficulty Options, 40/60 FPS for Series X, & more)
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
Why couldn't you just use time dilation (ie a 10x 20x 100x button)? You don't need a lore reason for it, just do it. It's not like their world building currently makes much sense as it stands, so it's not gonna get any worse.
I like having the option but I still prefer the zoom in. It's more intimate. I find the zoom out to be too far from the character.What do you think of the new camera view during conversations?
Interesting. Bethesda games really have that telltale ZOOM IN ON FACE look, so this is a nice departure. It's a bit more natural, less awkward.
True, I don't remember people throwing shade at Mass Effect because the journey between locations was effectively a load screen.
Exactly. And I know Starfield has some space sim gameplay elements (flying etc) but that still doesn't make it a space sim.
Problem is that Todd Howard was talking out his butt and hyped people up about space and exploration and so on.
I am fine with what Starfield is now BUT I expected a different game from what I was shown and told.
And I am not the only one.
That's fair. I loved the game obviously but I don't think the Direct was misleading at all. People will have different takeaways from the Direct but I got everything I expected out of the game based on what they talked about and showed. We already knew it didn't have seamless ground to space travel before launch, for example.
Granted, I probably hyped myself up more than Todd did. :DD
I'll give them that.
That being said, I'll definitely pick the game back up because the changes do look promising.
And if I want a full blown space sim, there are other games for that type of experience.
Good to see them finally adding in much needed QoL features with this update, even though most of it should have been there from day one, not months after launch.
60fps is the big one though, so much for the old narrative that it couldn't be done because console CPU's being too weak, but whatever the real reason, it's good to see it finally happen and also nice to see VRR 40fps mode too.
60fps is the big one though, so much for the old narrative that it couldn't be done because console CPU's being too weak, but whatever the real reason, it's good to see it finally happen and also nice to see VRR 40fps mode too.
But it 'tricks' people. I do think it leads to a better ux ultimately.
I guess lol (also there is already some of this, like taking off and landing, traveling to another planet in the system etc)
Yep pretty much but it can make the game feel a lot different.
It's like those crawl space and elevators loading screens, they could all just faded to black but giving the illusion that something is actually happening helps with the wait.
I suppose but there may be situations where the loading screen would be shorter than the cutscene that plays.
I agree that it would be a nice addition (I was never really bothered by the loading screens that much anyway) but I'm not sure it would satisfy the concerns of people who want to be able to seamlessly fly everywhere (which is just not realistic and never was in a BGS game).
So goodWhat do you think of the new camera view during conversations?
It helps a lot with the immersion and the cohesive experience.
I'd rather see some pretty and smooth cutscenes than a simple and boring loading screen.
They did that for the elevators in Fallout 4, I don't see how they can't do an in cockpit loading transition that masks the feeling of a loading screen
Speaking of which I prefer the Fallout elevators and would prefer that over the black screen Starfield has.
As I said above, the game already has lots of these. Docking with space stations, traveling from one planet to another within the same system, jumping from one system to another, landing and taking off from a planet. They're all the immersive cutscenes that you describe. I'd argue that those cutscenes are actually more common in regular play than the traditional loading screens. I think it only plays a traditional loading screen if you fast travel directly to a location on another planet, so you're skipping take off, grav jump and landing, but also you're getting there much quicker.
I love it - I modded Fallout 4 recently on Xbox to essentially be this (silent protagonist, with free camera movement during dialogue, no zoom or cinematic angles)What do you think of the new camera view during conversations?
Mhh, at the moment I don't see anything related. But I didn't check the logs yet
I do like Starfield's use of screenshots taken in Photo Mode for loading screens.
You fell entranced into Todd Howard's eyes and his leather jacket like we all did.
I loved the game honestly, if it wasn't for Alan Wake it would've been my personal GOTY last year, I hadn't realized the update was out on the steam beta branch, I'm downloading it now to see, does anyone know if you can transfer (manually of course) savefiles between the Microsoft Store version and the Steam one? Because I'd be curious to try it out.
GitHub - HarukaMa/starfield-xgp-import: Import .sfs savefile to Xbox version
Import .sfs savefile to Xbox version. Contribute to HarukaMa/starfield-xgp-import development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com
releases here: https://github.com/HarukaMa/starfield-xgp-import/releases
and if you wanna go from PCGP to Steam..
Releases · Z1ni/XGP-save-extractor
Python script to extract savefiles out of Xbox Game Pass for PC games - Z1ni/XGP-save-extractor
github.com
I feel this way about all their games (cept maybe ESO since I haven't done any there yet). For some reason I really look forward to crafting in these games and they don't deliver well enough.
They just need to stop linking it to level ups and talent points already.
The new update looks nice! I'm pretty much done with the game, so I probably won't play at least until the DLC gives me a reason again, but I'll be curious to see what else they add and change going forward.
I really like the tease about vehicles. I still think some of the planetary exploration is lacking, but it would have made getting around a lot less tedious if they had been there at release.
I really like the tease about vehicles. I still think some of the planetary exploration is lacking, but it would have made getting around a lot less tedious if they had been there at release.
That and the modding scene finally being allowed to take off should give the game new life. It's absurd that it's taken a year to get the creation kit considering how important it is to the game's long-term success.
Ok, that's kinda cool. You lose a bit of realism, but when we're already folding space and moving objects with our mind I guess we could fudge some faster than light travel with conventional rocket engines. Realism should never overrule fun.
Indeed. People love to bring up that one modder that shit on Starfield and swore off modding for it as if Starfield's CC will be DOA. Mod creators / emulators / OSS people are great, but can also be incredibly fickle.
I think Starfield will be a very open slate for mods and there's gonna be huge opportunity to be "that mod" that transforms the game and makes waves. Like someone's already done a pretty massive mod without any special tools.
Yes, of course, does have natural exploration, it's just Starfield's exploration is more city focused. It's less, "ooohh, cool rock formation. I wonder what's over there." And more, "alright, what's going on in this back alley part of the city."
Starfield pushes you more into landing at central hubs and walking around finding things to do as opposed to naturally exploring the "wilderness" to find new stuff. In this way, there is some slight resemblance to Cyberpunk style of exploration; which is less natural and more targeted and centralized. That said, the lack of a seamless transition from ground to space, really hurts the experience; even if you need to later load to travel to another system.
I do have to say that the idea that load screens makes the idea of the feeling of exploration impossible is nonsense. After all, so many people love Mass Effect 1 for its exploration and that consisted of tons load screens and then being plopped onto a 5x5m area on a map. But the reasons Mass Effect was good was because 1) how quick the loading was and 2) how immediate the ability to find stuff was. You picked an interesting looking spot in the galaxy map, you arrived, and you pretty much would immediately get a message over your communications systems pointing you to some dispute in the area that needed your assistance or some distress call.
In Starfield, you will jump to a new system and have no idea (unless brought there from some quest you overheard) what system even has life. You'll then scan around until you find a place with some POIs, land, fuck about as you try to determine whether there is anything of value in that space or just procedural content, and then leave. It's the actual lack of curation that hurts Starfield's exploration. You can go ANYWHERE, problem is the majority of places have nothing of actual value to do.
What do you think of the new camera view during conversations?
The Zoom-In is the correct approach, especially for a non-voiced camera.
Hell, I HATE the camera system in FO4. The absolute worse one Bethesda has done yet because it's so goddamn janky. I don't know if it was because they were committed to the idea of a player being able to back out of a conversation whenever they felt like, which is a useless fucking idea, or whatever. But it was horrendous. If you're going to do a conversation system with a voiced protagonist with A/B camera switches, you need the camera to lock everything in-place and not allow a bunch of crap going on in the background. Further, it needs to be able to skip conversations quickly without delay or screwing things up.
FO4's system can only be described as floaty or janky. It just did not work. I'm thankful Starfield went with the zoom-in.
This is how I feel too. Maybe they wanted to bring it back to the way they did things in Arena and Daggerfall, with 1:1 scale where walking to the next town actually would take you an entire day and you can just fast travel everywhere for convenience, but I think they should've recognized that the outer space element would give them more options.
One of the biggest issues with space travel is actually that you can initiate a warp to new places without ever actually interacting with your ship. Fast traveling to places you've been to before from anywhere is understandable, but I think the game would feel somewhat different if warping to systems you haven't been to before actually required getting to your cockpit, flying into space, and initiating the warp sequence. A cheap way to fix this problem would be to add a transition sequence whenever you initiate fast travel from outside your ship, that shows your ship taking off and warping.
I mentioned this earlier, but this is why I think Bethesda wrote themselves into a corner. They wanted the setting to feel somewhat grounded but the decision ended up holding them back more than helping, especially since Starfield is, at-heart, a AAA game for mainstream audiences that ultimately prioritizes fun over realism.. Elite still has a more "realistic" representation of space and flight physics and it still has a shortcut.
I don't think they're totally screwed though. If space flight is fast enough to allow for piloting around a planet, and to reach its moons in real time, taking up to a few minutes of travel between those sort of distances at most, then that's still a lot of opportunity for emergent encounters and POIs, and in locations close enough to celestial bodies that you'd realistically expect to find them. POIs and encounters in the vaaaaaastly empty space between planets are going to be less likely realistically, and so not as much of an issue to warp jump between (provided warping is a little more immersive and doesn't require opening the star map each time...)
People said the same about Fallout 4 back then, that it was so bad that modders will just stick with Skyrim. Way smaller games than Starfield have big modding scenes, that concern is just weird fear mongering
Mass Effect 1 was actually properly designed around having loading screens, Starfield was not. Yeah sure, Mass Effect 1 had lots of loading screens (as do many other games, including Skyrim), but it was a consistent and cohesive experience.
With Starfield we have a big RPG, procedurally generated planets to "explore", and....well whatever space is supposed to be. It almost feels like playing 3 different games in one session.
They tried to shove a Bethesda RPG into some VERY limited proc gen tech, and stitched it all together with fast travel and basic loading screens.
You say you don't believe load screens can make the feeling of exploration impossible, but take a moment to imagine what it would be like if, let's say Skyrim, could not dynamically load in new chunks of the world as you move around and the ONLY way to travel to that mountain you see off in the distance was for you to open up your map to fast travel and load in to it.
edit: I do want to say I'm really happy that they actually are making ground vehicles, I really didn't believe they would ever do that.
People said it about Skryim Special Edition too. And now that edition seems to get the most focus.
100%, the amount of articles and youtube videos that were generated off the one modder shitting on Starfield was nuts- so much clickbait. The modder didn't enjoy Starfield so decided it wasn't worth their time- and moved on.
People complain about loading elevators on The Citadel in Mass Effect. Starfield's loading screens are just as "consistent." But, as myself and your post notes, it is not a cohesive experience. Starfield doesn't cohesively tie its loads to maximize exploration. Let's compare and assume in each instance the player is not in their ship.
Mass Effect 1: Run back to ship if in a level, like Citadel, or teleport to ship if using Mako. -> Go to Galaxy Map -> Select Star System to travel to -> Watch or skip undocking cutscene (if at space dock) or go immediately to loading screen of Mass Relay Jump -> Arrive at Star System -> Navigate to planet you want to land, with full view of entire system, and click land -> Watch cutscene of Mako dropping to planet. Done.
Starfield: Run or fast travel back to ship->Navigate or teleport directly to seat->Leave Orbit with cutscene-> Enter space and pull up navigation screen-> Select Star System you wish to jump to->Wait for Grav Drive to boot up->Watch Grav Drive Jump cutscene-> Arrive in Star System-> Pull up Navigation to determine which planets are worth exploring, do not have clear view of full system->Travel to other system which requires loading-> After finding planet, select where you want to land-> Watch loading of ship landing on planet->Choose whether to leave seat or immediately exit on land. Done.
OR
Pull up navigation system outside of ship->Navigate to system you wish to travel ->Load Screen -> Immediately be transported to system in ship -> Repeat remaining steps.
Starfield has more loading and more steps in between actually getting out of your goddamn ship and exploring the area because it wants everything to be diegetic.
Will never happen. Until they decide that being able to knock around almost everything in a room with physics and having it remember where the body of an enemy you killed 7 in game days ago doesn't really matter to the experience, it will stay segmented.
There is a reason why the best looking games have almost completely static worlds.
I feel like going to your ship would be instant if they hadn't decided to make the cockpits all glass and the ship physically in places to help with that.
