Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Starfield Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

Drakortha

Liturgist
Joined
Jan 23, 2016
Messages
1,662
Location
Terra Australis
I passed on 76 and it's looking like Starfield will be another pass for me. The entire premise just looks so cookie cutter, generic, and played out already. It doesn't help that the animations and even some of the models look like they came straight out of Fallout 4 from 2015, which will be 8 years old by the time this comes out. I paid attention to the skill trees shown in the previews and it was all stuff like "Guns do 10% extra damage now / 20% extra damage / 30% extra damage, etc.

Is this really all they have to show for? All this work on a new IP and they can't even bother to improve on the core mechanics? what's even the point of Starfield if they aren't even going to try to shoot for the stars? Todd is a terrible salesperson, I don't buy a thing he says anymore. He comes off incredibly smug and his fake confidence does not encourage any confidence in the live service product he is trying to sell.

I'm all for dev's taking a risk and trying something different but imo they should have stuck with the TES > Fallout > TES pipeline. Skyrim hasn't aged well and I'd rather forget TESO exists.

This is coming from someone who finished Morrowind back in the day, was hyped for Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim, and even Fallout 4. Enjoyed all of them (to varying degrees) but 76 was an unmitigated disaster in so many ways. The best thing they could have done right now would be to develop a new TES game and stop with the half-assed PR bullshit and stop going down the live service route. But after the Microsoft acquisition I think it's over folks.
 

Yosharian

Arcane
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
9,483
Location
Grand Chien
I passed on 76 and it's looking like Starfield will be another pass for me. The entire premise just looks so cookie cutter, generic, and played out already. It doesn't help that the animations and even some of the models look like they came straight out of Fallout 4 from 2015, which will be 8 years old by the time this comes out. I paid attention to the skill trees shown in the previews and it was all stuff like "Guns do 10% extra damage now / 20% extra damage / 30% extra damage, etc.

Is this really all they have to show for? All this work on a new IP and they can't even bother to improve on the core mechanics? what's even the point of Starfield if they aren't even going to try to shoot for the stars? Todd is a terrible salesperson, I don't buy a thing he says anymore. He comes off incredibly smug and his fake confidence does not encourage any confidence in the live service product he is trying to sell.

I'm all for dev's taking a risk and trying something different but imo they should have stuck with the TES > Fallout > TES pipeline. Skyrim hasn't aged well and I'd rather forget TESO exists.

This is coming from someone who finished Morrowind back in the day, was hyped for Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim, and even Fallout 4. Enjoyed all of them (to varying degrees) but 76 was an unmitigated disaster in so many ways. The best thing they could have done right now would be to develop a new TES game and stop with the half-assed PR bullshit and stop going down the live service route. But after the Microsoft acquisition I think it's over folks.
Yes whenever I watch a video of the gameplay my hype dries up as significantly
 

Latelistener

Arcane
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
2,586
Honestly just wtf are you talking about? They're literally using the same old Gamebryo engine again. "Shoot for the stars" my ass. It's not just how it looks, the engine is a pain to work with and they don't do anything about it despite how much money they've made with Skyrim. Compared to some other open world games all of this is just pathetic.

Also, Microsoft acquisition might be the only thing that kept this trainwreck from coming out on 11.11.22. I bet they overrode the decision once they saw in what state the game was.
 

Drakortha

Liturgist
Joined
Jan 23, 2016
Messages
1,662
Location
Terra Australis
Honestly just wtf are you talking about? They're literally using the same old Gamebryo engine again. "Shoot for the stars" my ass. It's not just how it looks, the engine is a pain to work with and they don't do anything about it despite how much money they've made with Skyrim. Compared to some other open world games all of this is just pathetic.

That was my point. You'd think anything would be possible with enough money and influence but in this medium it just seems to squander any and all potential.
 

Latelistener

Arcane
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
2,586
Honestly just wtf are you talking about? They're literally using the same old Gamebryo engine again. "Shoot for the stars" my ass. It's not just how it looks, the engine is a pain to work with and they don't do anything about it despite how much money they've made with Skyrim. Compared to some other open world games all of this is just pathetic.
That was my point. You'd think anything would be possible with enough money and influence but in this medium it just seems to squander any and all potential.
It depends. It may have worked with Skyrim, but now we had games like RDR2. I've just recently played it a bit and I have no opinion regarding the game as a whole, but I can see that it's a technological marvel with a shit ton of details. Unlike 10 years ago, the selection of open world games is much bigger.

TL;DR it won't "just work" this time. I also don't feel any hype from the crowd for this game, but that's another topic. Maybe this time they'll receive a much needed slap in the face. Nothing will change otherwise.
 

Silverfish

Arbiter
Joined
Dec 4, 2019
Messages
3,167
The selection of open world games is larger, but few offer the same level of interactivity as Bethesda games, which I've always maintained is their secret sauce. RDR2 handily wins in terms of graphics, but in that game you can't pick up and manipulate every random item, pickpocket NPCs clothing or drop a valuable item on the ground and watch a brawl ensue as everyone tries to grab it first.
 

Child of Malkav

Erudite
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Messages
2,518
Location
Romania
I think their secret is the modding community. Without mods I wouldn't touch their games. Interactivity adds something to their games as well but it's very basic. I don't know, no one knows the key to success, you just luck into it.
 
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
1,611
I think their secret is the modding community. Without mods I wouldn't touch their games. Interactivity adds something to their games as well but it's very basic. I don't know, no one knows the key to success, you just luck into it.
People who mod their games are a small niche. If mods are of any benefit to bethesda game sales it's in how they create long-term publicity or mindshare by giving the gaming "media" something to talk about on a slow day long after the game's release.
 

Latelistener

Arcane
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
2,586
The selection of open world games is larger, but few offer the same level of interactivity as Bethesda games, which I've always maintained is their secret sauce. RDR2 handily wins in terms of graphics, but in that game you can't pick up and manipulate every random item, pickpocket NPCs clothing or drop a valuable item on the ground and watch a brawl ensue as everyone tries to grab it first.
Trust me, you're not going to impress anyone with that nowadays. In RDR2 there is an actual wind that moves your scent that could spook nearby prey. When I said technological, I didn't mean just visuals.

Yes, you can pick any items in the game world, but NPCs rarely recognize those actions, otherwise they would've noticed buckets on their heads. That's why the world feels dead. You could theoretically build something amazing based on this, but it's Bethesda we're talking about. The gameplay of Starfield with its visuals that hardly differentiate from Fallout 4 and constant fps drops feels plain pathetic. They even put some epic music in the gameplay like something amazing is happening that's suppose to impress you, but it never does.
 

InD_ImaginE

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
5,415
Pathfinder: Wrath
This is already been said pages ago by rusty, but the reason modern Bethesda game is successful is because its approach to themepark open world is unique. There are several "school" so to speak on open world but mostly are doing it Ubisoft style. That Bethesda is this semi simulation themepark (well with Starfield maybe not so much because the worldspaces are divided) is unqiue.

Bethesda will stop being successful when there is actually a game providing the same kind of open world but better, And with modding, the PC market for Bethesda games will also always be more alive than any competitors that lazily just use Unreal or Unity.
 

Latelistener

Arcane
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
2,586
The only school of Ubisoft I know of is when they lock story behind a few monotonous activities to increase your playtime. Other than that, they've been following the same rules of systemic gameplay introduced by the first immersive sims.

But the thing is, they've been splicing it up with theme park content too. Odyssey and Valhalla are different compared to Origins and everything that came before. Same with Rockstar.
 

DJOGamer PT

Arcane
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
7,475
Location
Lusitânia
In RDR2 there is an actual wind that moves your scent that could spook nearby prey. When I said technological, I didn't mean just visuals.
Tech gimmicks
That's the only thing that R* still does well
Burning millions of dollars to make their turds shiny and polished to "impress" the plebs
The moment you step foot outside the scripted cutscene gameplay, the game immeadeatly shuts you down

Nah
Silverfish is right
The level of player freedom and interactivity that Betheseda sandboxes offer is almost unique to them
 

Latelistener

Arcane
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
2,586
I went and check whether "NPCs fighting over a valuable item" is not another lie from the toad, as I never actually tried that in my walkthrough. What do you think I saw? Two dunmers fighting over it and one of them screams: "You dare fight a Dunmer?!" That's the level of Bethesda right here. They do mediocre theme park content and they still cannot into systemic gameplay.

On top of that, their tech is outdated and also pain to work with. As I learned sometime early in this year from a 3d artist who worked with Bethesda a couple of years ago, some things in the engine hasn't changed since 2012. Some plugins for it were written for 3ds Max 2011 so everyone had to use that version.
 

Zombra

An iron rock in the river of blood and evil
Patron
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
11,573
Location
Black Goat Woods !@#*%&^
Make the Codex Great Again! RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
I kind of agree with Silverfish that extra interactivity is part of the Bethesda charm ....... I also maintain that it's all really dumb shit. "But look I can throw a dinner plate on the floor" damages immersion way more than it helps. "But I can build a tower of empty buckets", it's like, is that what you like to see in an adventure story? Rockstar has huge interactivity too but it all feels like it's part of a coherent vision. Bethesda just throws in a bunch of crazy systems that are worthless to the intended experience and ultimately don't make sense. Which yeah, it's charming in a way, like it's charming in a driving game when you can hit a rock and go flying straight up 200' in the air because of wonky physics. It's kinda fun, but it's not good.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,894
They even put some epic music in the gameplay like something amazing is happening that's suppose to impress you, but it never does.
This is one the things that piss me off the most with modern games/movies/tv/whatever. The audio cues are so fucking obvious, they're always trying so hard to elicit a response, and it always falls so flat, it's disgusting. It's honestly ridiculous how little they respect the audience's intelligence.

It's like they're poking at you with a stick: "GO ON, ITZ TIME 4 DA FEELZ"
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,894
I kind of agree with @Silverfish that extra interactivity is part of the Bethesda charm ....... I also maintain that it's all really dumb shit.
I have a friend whose sole reason for not playing any Bethesda games ever is the fact that the PC can pick up dumb shit like knives, forks, etc. and other assorted random materials from the world. I suspect there are many such cases.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom