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

[Harthwain]

Welcome to the internet.

Sure...? It's not me who has a problem with that here.

 

[Gargaune]

Thats a blanket statement. You are not taking into account the context of this one conversation. I agree that being able to have longform discussion is a huge part of being able to find enjoyment on a forum. That does not apply to every single conversation though.

I am not going to quote quotes and derail this shit any more than it already is but he used an example of something in which he clearly didn't exhaust all an NPC's lines of dialogue, didn't pay attention to not only an important sidequest, but the main story as well. If this dude is using something at his "favorite example" then I would expect a little more knowledge on the subject. He was simply joining the train of Bethesda/Fallout 4 hate searching for some pats on the back. I called him out on his lack of understading. The dude most likely logs back in and plays some more, goes to reddit, does a bit of research, and then gets back to write what amounts to an excuse for being ill informed and calls it a day. Gets some buttons and feels better about it all. Time is sometimes an element of conversations.

There's no context to "this one conversation" because you and I weren't even having one, I just added something to what Zed said (which I stand by) and elaborated for you when I saw your crap. All you're doing is projecting your unhealthy approach to Codexing, chill the fuck out.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

To everyone trying to defend Bethesda games because they are supposedly ambitious, or give the player a sandbox to be anything, or whatever else, sorry, I don't buy this at all.

If they were actually ambitious, they would have hired the people/made it a goal to develop actually good combat, a modern graphics engine, hire good writers, etc. Game after game they do nothing but release the same shit that's clearly quantity over quality (that's when they are not re-releasing 400 editions of Skyrim for microwaves or what not), and has absolutely nothing of value in it. If the only good things about your games is that they are large and open and can be modded, then you are not making good games.

What Bethesda IS doing is make shallow, bland games that ANYONE can pick up and play, and this is why the combat is always such shit, so that your grandma could master it, and why does writing matter when the players are some dumb kids or casuals. This lets them sell a lot of copies, though lately, Ubisoft has sort of overtaken them as the maker of shitty, bland, accessible open world RPGs with nearly infinite content.

 

[Norfleet]

I do know that backstory and you're not helping your point. Clair explicitly mentions retirement and how the Rexford was so much better back in Marowski Sr.'s days and how, as you quote, the clientele was more "sophisticated." This is easy for us to parse relative to our own reality, but highly incongruous in the postapocalyptic wasteland we're shown. Does Goodneighbor have a pension plan?

Retirement exists independently of the concept of a pension plan. You just become old, quit working, and live off your accumulated assets. That's retirement for those of us who exist outside of pension plans.

How much "more sophisticated" can the clientele get in a world where caravaners strap bags to cows instead of leveraging the forbidden magic of the wheel?

Presumably they have better suits and don't do drugs in the hallway.

but the guy in the market thinks baseball was the Circus Maximus.

I don't think he actually believes this and is just bullshitting, dramatizing the story so he can sell baseball bats as weapons. From what I've heard of his voice clips, he has that "dramatic street hawker" tone which strongly suggests not everything he says is something he believes to be truthful.

 

[Robotigan]

To everyone trying to defend Bethesda games because they are supposedly ambitious, or give the player a sandbox to be anything, or whatever else, sorry, I don't buy this at all.

If they were actually ambitious, they would have hired the people/made it a goal to develop actually good combat, a modern graphics engine, hire good writers, etc. Game after game they do nothing but release the same shit that's clearly quantity over quality (that's when they are not re-releasing 400 editions of Skyrim for microwaves or what not), and has absolutely nothing of value in it. If the only good things about your games is that they are large and open and can be modded, then you are not making good games.

What Bethesda IS doing is make shallow, bland games that ANYONE can pick up and play, and this is why the combat is always such shit, so that your grandma could master it, and why does writing matter when the players are some dumb kids or casuals. This lets them sell a lot of copies, though lately, Ubisoft has sort of overtaken them as the maker of shitty, bland, accessible open world RPGs with nearly infinite content.

It shouldn't be that hard to understand. You know how millions of people play thousands of hours of Runescape, RimWorld, or Terraria despite all of these having shit graphics, shit combat, and nonexistent stories? It's like that.

 

[Raghar]

I completely forgot this exist, when it would be out?

 

[Zombra]

Bethesda games aren't perfect in every way, therefore anyone who claims to have valid reasons for enjoying them is wrong.

That's a really, really dumb attitude. Seriously man? I can't appreciate the freedom of approach or superior character advancement systems in these games unless they get a better graphics engine? lol.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Yeah, it also has a few other things that Skyrim doesn't: great writing and lore, great characters, great graphics, serviceable combat, great C&C, etc.

What are you talking about? Don't you remember great Skyrim characters like, uh...what's his name? You know, the Nord guy. Or...um...the Dark Brotherhood? Or that vampire lady in the expansion? What was her name...?

It's been years since I played through Witcher 3, but I can name all the main cast off the top of my head, and I remember everything about them. Even the ones I didn't like or thought were a boring like Keria Metz.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

I hope the first torrents are relatively bug free.

What are you talking about? Don't you remember great Skyrim characters like, uh...what's his name? You know, the Nord guy. Or...um...the Dark Brotherhood? Or that vampire lady in the expansion? What was her name...?

Which Nord Guy Eorlund Grey-mane? Hadvar? Ralof? There's billions of them. Babbet is the only person who matters in the brotherhood. She was at the Epstein island at one point too. And the vampire lady is Serana. Lots of decent rule34 content for her

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Bethesda games aren't perfect in every any way, therefore anyone who claims to have valid reasons for enjoying them is wrong.

That's a really, really dumb attitude. Seriously man? I can't appreciate the freedom of approach or superior character advancement systems in these games unless they get a better graphics engine? lol.

Fixed it for you. Freedom of approach doesn't get you many brownie points in a land infested with draugr caves and not much else. And character development in bethesda games? Lol.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Which Nord Guy Eorlund Grey-mane? Hadvar? Ralof?

I have no idea who any of these people are.

The interesting one. With the accent.

Babbet is the only person who matters in the brotherhood.

Again, no idea who you're talking about.

And the vampire lady is Serana. Lots of decent rule34 content for her

I actually do remember her now. Mostly, she felt like a ripoff of Selene from Underworld, complete with daddy issues. I liked the quest to retrieve her from whatever tomb. That was pretty cool. And the dragon fight on the ice was somewhat memorable.

I also remember General Tullius, but just for how awful his voice acting is, and the fact that I liked Saul Tigh from BSG.

Every other game, there are upwards of dozens of characters I can recall. Baldur's Gate, I remember even one off gimmicks like Noober.

But in Skyrim, none of it matters. All of the characters are forgettable trash. And most Bethesda games are like this. Except for Daggerfall and maybe Arena or Redguard (never played Redguard) . The King of Worms is more memorable than any character in any Bethesda game afterward.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Babbet is the only person who matters in the brotherhood.

Again, no idea who you're talking about.

She's the vampire loli.

And the vampire lady is Serana. Lots of decent rule34 content for her

I actually do remember her now. Mostly, she felt like a ripoff of Selene from Underworld, complete with daddy issues.

That's because she is. And that's why Lover's lab exists.

 

[Zombra]

Freedom of approach doesn't get you many brownie points in a land infested with draugr caves and not much else.

You honestly think there's nothing to do in Skyrim except button mash draugr?

And character development in bethesda games? Lol.

Yes. Again, I made four distinct characters with very different capabilities and behaviors, and enjoyed dozens of hours with each, so I know what I'm talking about. (And by the way, most times when I played through a quest with more than one character, it resolved differently.) I'm sure when you tried the game (if you even tried it) you just said "Oh, I can press W and LMB and shoot things with my OP assault rifle? OK I'll just do that then" and didn't bother ever trying anything else before declaring that there was nothing to do. For people with a little imagination there are a ton of build options to explore.

 

[Late Bloomer]

Yes. Again, I made four distinct characters with very different capabilities and behaviors, and enjoyed dozens of hours with each, so I know what I'm talking about. (And by the way, most times when I played through a quest with more than one character, it resolved differently.) I'm sure when you tried the game (if you even tried it) you just said "Oh, I can press W and LMB and shoot things with my OP assault rifle? OK I'll just do that then" and didn't bother ever trying anything else before declaring that there was nothing to do. For people with a little imagination there are a ton of build options to explore.

 

[BruceVC]

Yeah, it also has a few other things that Skyrim doesn't: great writing and lore, great characters, great graphics, serviceable combat, great C&C, etc.

What are you talking about? Don't you remember great Skyrim characters like, uh...what's his name? You know, the Nord guy. Or...um...the Dark Brotherhood? Or that vampire lady in the expansion? What was her name...?

It's been years since I played through Witcher 3, but I can name all the main cast off the top of my head, and I remember everything about them. Even the ones I didn't like or thought were a boring like Keria Metz.

Edgy do you know there is is a Viconia mod you can load for both Skyrim and Oblivion, she becomes a companion with a full set of quests. Throw in Dwemer gold chainmail bikini armor with the big breasts mod and I can guarantee you she becomes ....indelible

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/28941

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

...

For people with a little imagination there are a ton of build options to explore.

For people with a little imagination, they could sit there, staring at a wall and imagine a lot of build options also... Doesn't invalidate the point that Bethesda games suck.

 

[Zombra]

For people with a little imagination, they could sit there, staring at a wall and imagine a lot of build options also... Doesn't invalidate the point that Bethesda games suck.

So to you a game is only good if it's made for people with no imagination.

Story checks out.

 

[Harthwain]

Yes. Again, I made four distinct characters with very different capabilities and behaviors, and enjoyed dozens of hours with each, so I know what I'm talking about. (And by the way, most times when I played through a quest with more than one character, it resolved differently.) I'm sure when you tried the game (if you even tried it) you just said "Oh, I can press W and LMB and shoot things with my OP assault rifle? OK I'll just do that then" and didn't bother ever trying anything else before declaring that there was nothing to do. For people with a little imagination there are a ton of build options to explore.

Are you talking about Skyrim?

Because I have to say that as far as "behaviors" and "quest resolutions" go you are limited - at best - to two (three if we assume failing a quest is an option) outcomes. At least this was my experience and I played with three different builds.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Edgy do you know there is is a Viconia mod you can load for both Skyrim and Oblivion, she becomes a companion with a full set of quests. Throw in Dwemer gold chainmail bikini armor with the big breasts mod and I can guarantee you she becomes ....indelible

More like inedible. Crom on his mountain, why don't you just fap to the actual pornstar and have done.

 

[Zombra]

Because I have to say that as far as "behaviors" and "quest resolutions" go you are limited - at best - to two (three if we assume failing a quest is an option) outcomes. At least this was my experience and I played with three different builds.

"Behaviors" is my own thing, based on not only what I built each character to do but what I wanted them to do. This is all predicated on my axiom that the purpose of a game is to enjoy it, not to get xp. For example, I wanted a character who never engaged in combat, which is obviously suboptimal but it was fun as hell; whereas in most RPGs it would have been utterly impossible. I think that character actually got more gameplay hours than any of the rest. Anyway that early decision affected the character build obviously, but also changed my behavior as a player substantially when approaching problems.

Quest resolutions, you may be right that there were two outcomes per quest at most, although I'd be surprised if some of the main quests at least didn't have a few more. Except for some of the early mainline forced stuff, I doubt I ever played the same quest more than twice.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

I'm thinking mostly of Skyrim here, with its innovative and superior "learn by doing" advancement mechanics, and quite a few noncombat skills. I built four completely different characters in Skyrim, and enjoyed dozens of hours with each, often pursuing the same quests in completely different ways. Morrowind, although hampered by a more traditional "get xp and spend skill points" advancement system, still allowed for a great variety of meaningfully distinct builds.

Morrowind, as with Daggerfall before it, has skills improve through use, which then generate level increases that provide attribute points (not skill points, which increase from using that skill, and there are no experience points). The only substantial difference between those two games is that in Daggerfall each level up provides a few attribute points that can be spent freely, whereas in Morrowind each skill is tied to a specific attribute and on level up the player selects three attributes to increase where each has a modifier from x1 to x5 depending on the number of skill increases associated with that attribute since the last level increase. Unfortunately, the Morrowind system encourages the player to game it, since it is ideal to group 10 skill increases (but preferably no more than 10) in skills associated with one attribute between level ups in order to obtain the maximum x5 modifier.

Oblivion was unchanged from Morrowind, keeping the "learning by doing" skill system that existed since Daggerfall and even maintaining Morrowind's attribute/skill modifier system. Skyrim still has a "learning by doing" skill system, but it eliminated attributes, instead asking the player to select one of health/magicka/stamina to increase on level up while also giving the character a perk point to spend on the new skill-related perk tree system, inspired by perks in Fallout 3/NV but substantially different in that each skill has a series of related perks, with dependencies forming a tree-like structure.

 

[Harthwain]

Quest resolutions, you may be right that there were two outcomes per quest at most, although I'd be surprised if some of the main quests at least didn't have a few more. Except for some of the early mainline forced stuff, I doubt I ever played the same quest more than twice.

This is exactly why I prefer quests being free-form (as opposed to narrowly pre-determined). This changes "bring item X" from a simple fetch-quest ("Item X is in location Y") to something more exploratory in nature. You can find it in a ruin. Or steal it from someone. Or buy it. Or receive it as reward/payment for doing another quest, etc.

And you can spread this approach to more than just quest. It's really sad that more cRPGs don't take this route and we're stuck mostly with heavily narrative-driven ones.

 

[Zombra]

Morrowind, as with Daggerfall before it, has skills improve through use, which then generate level increases that provide attribute points (not skill points, which increase from using that skill, and there are no experience points). The only substantial difference between those two games is that in Daggerfall each level up provides a few attribute points that can be spent freely, whereas in Morrowind each skill is tied to a specific attribute and on level up the player selects three attributes to increase where each has a modifier from x1 to x5 depending on the number of skill increases associated with that attribute since the last level increase. Unfortunately, the Morrowind system encourages the player to game it, since it is ideal to group 10 skill increases (but preferably no more than 10) in skills associated with one attribute between level ups in order to obtain the maximum x5 modifier.

Oblivion was unchanged from Morrowind, keeping the "learning by doing" skill system that existed since Daggerfall and even maintaining Morrowind's attribute/skill modifier system. Skyrim still has a "learning by doing" skill system, but it eliminated attributes, instead asking the player to select one of health/magicka/stamina to increase on level up while also giving the character a perk point to spend on the new skill-related perk tree system, inspired by perks in Fallout 3/NV but substantially different in that each skill has a series of related perks, with dependencies forming a tree-like structure.

Yeah, that's how I remember it too. I remember being a little annoyed with Morrowind's level-ups for that reason - I felt like the punishment was too severe for using suboptimal builds, i.e. those that didn't focus on skills grouped by attribute. Didn't Morrowind and Oblivion have "perks" too? I feel like when skills got to 25, 50, 75, 100 there was a little bonus. Maybe just in Oblivion?

Anyway, when Todd announced that Skyrim was doing away with attributes, I was outraged like everyone else. When I actually played it, I realized not only did I not miss stats at all, but I actually had more control over what my characters became good at. I wasn't sacrificing xp efficiency if I developed skills previously governed by different stats; now it was all about the LBD. There were now more builds available, many more, not fewer.

Moving on to Fallout 4, Bethesda necessarily took a step backwards - they couldn't break from the series format of "just get xp, who cares how". Kill 50 raiders to get better at lockpicking type of play. Obviously I'm not a fan of this, and anyway the game in general feels much more constricted in a much more W+LMB style of play. I didn't feel I should hack more computers to get better at hacking when it was so much easier to just shoot stuff.

Which brings us to the actual thread topic, Starfield and what is good, or might be good, about Bethesda games. We haven't seen the Starfield progression system in action yet, but my understanding is that once a skill is unlocked, as in Skyrim it is increased "by doing", but in a more elaborate and engaging way than before: by overcoming specific challenges. Instead of "shoot 50 guys for +1 Pistol skill, then shoot another 100 guys for +2 Pistol skill", it might be "shoot 50 guys for +1 skill, then hit 50 pistol headshots for +2 skill", with stuff like this driving not only the character to get more experience, but the player learning more about the game as well. I see a lot of this kind of thing in games lately, where achieving specific things gives you not only a little flag on your Steam profile, but an actual in-game benefit as well, and driving towards those goals teaches you more about the game. Example, in Shadow of War there's a thing called "Ledge Takedowns" where you're if you're hanging by your fingers and an unaware orc walks above you on the cliff edge, you can get an instant stealth kill. The game showed me how to do those but it seemed hard, so I never really bothered with them until the game put a little bonus objective to a quest, so I revisited the controls and learned to do them, and now I've added it to my bag of tricks. Will this type of incentive be fun in Starfield? I don't know yet, but I can easily see how it could be. And I like the idea of earning my grandmaster skill level by pulling off all kinds of weird scenarios, not just repetitively shooting 10000 guys.

 

[Zombra]

This is exactly why I prefer quests being free-form (as opposed to narrowly pre-determined). This changes "bring item X" from a simple fetch-quest ("Item X is in location Y") to something more exploratory in nature. You can find it in a ruin. Or steal it from someone. Or buy it. Or receive it as reward/payment for doing another quest, etc.
And you can spread this approach to more than just quest. It's really sad that more cRPGs don't take this route and we're stuck mostly with heavily narrative-driven ones.

Yeah. One time Skyrim was very annoying. My noncombat character wanted to join the Stormcloaks (long story), and the guy said well bring me back an ice crystal, which you can get by killing an ice monster on Hill #1 I'll mark on your map. My character thought fuck that, they're expensive but sometimes you can buy an ice crystal from alchemists. So I went on a shopping spree, eventually found a crystal to buy, and took it back, but the quest marker said NO. YOU HAVE TO GO KILL THE ICE MONSTER. One of the few times I used the console to advance the quest manually. A fond memory though

Anyway, obviously I agree that it's always best when missions and quests focus on "getting it done" rather than attaching mechanical conditions to how it gets done.

 

[BruceVC]

I'm thinking mostly of Skyrim here, with its innovative and superior "learn by doing" advancement mechanics, and quite a few noncombat skills. I built four completely different characters in Skyrim, and enjoyed dozens of hours with each, often pursuing the same quests in completely different ways. Morrowind, although hampered by a more traditional "get xp and spend skill points" advancement system, still allowed for a great variety of meaningfully distinct builds.

Morrowind, as with Daggerfall before it, has skills improve through use, which then generate level increases that provide attribute points (not skill points, which increase from using that skill, and there are no experience points). The only substantial difference between those two games is that in Daggerfall each level up provides a few attribute points that can be spent freely, whereas in Morrowind each skill is tied to a specific attribute and on level up the player selects three attributes to increase where each has a modifier from x1 to x5 depending on the number of skill increases associated with that attribute since the last level increase. Unfortunately, the Morrowind system encourages the player to game it, since it is ideal to group 10 skill increases (but preferably no more than 10) in skills associated with one attribute between level ups in order to obtain the maximum x5 modifier.

Oblivion was unchanged from Morrowind, keeping the "learning by doing" skill system that existed since Daggerfall and even maintaining Morrowind's attribute/skill modifier system. Skyrim still has a "learning by doing" skill system, but it eliminated attributes, instead asking the player to select one of health/magicka/stamina to increase on level up while also giving the character a perk point to spend on the new skill-related perk tree system, inspired by perks in Fallout 3/NV but substantially different in that each skill has a series of related perks, with dependencies forming a tree-like structure.

But the solution to this is to use a mod like Ultimate Levelling which uses XP points for activities. It rewards you for doing things and allows much more level advancement flexibility

https://www.nexusmods.com/oblivion/mods/49134