Yes, you probably are. Plenty of people around here might think it's gonna be shit because this is the Codex, but they all know everyone's gonna buy it and play it for a million hours. Including themselves.Am I the only one who thinks this is going to bomb hard?
I just don't see what it brings to the table that No Man's Sky doesn't already provide.
Thanks for correcting us, friend! Could I bother you with asking for a definition of an RPG game so that we don't make this mistake again? Cheers!Bethesda hasn't made a RPG in more than a decade and with several other games already released.
Same can be said of Fallout 4, and that one sold great.Am I the only one who thinks this is going to bomb hard?
I just don't see what it brings to the table that No Man's Sky doesn't already provide.
I do be like this sometimes... I'm sowwy UwU UwU
Don't know about that. Realistically speaking they do not need that much space.I think the idea is the player will spend most of their time landing next to structures and other points of interest. My guess is they only simulated the entire surface because it made the rest of development that much easier. If a level designer wants to add a small settlement with its own questline on some random planet, they don't have to hardcode in a specific landing zone for that area. They just plonk it down with the knowledge that the landing mechanics are robust enough to accommodate wherever they decide to add the content. A peculiar trait of BGS that doesn't get enough mention (even though they themselves talk about it all time) is that their development process is basically creating a tool set so flexible and easy to work with that their developers can crank out a lot of content very quickly.
It would work exactly the same if the designer were to place it in a set point on one of the, say, three separate maps allocated to that specific planet, around points of interest. The advantage is that there's no need to come up with a novel system for handling an enormous open world area. Besides, functionally it amounts to the same thing, because without the vehicles you'll be teleporting via ship anyway.My guess is they only simulated the entire surface because it made the rest of development that much easier. If a level designer wants to add a small settlement with its own questline on some random planet, they don't have to hardcode in a specific landing zone for that area. They just plonk it down with the knowledge that the landing mechanics are robust enough to accommodate wherever they decide to add the content.
no bethesda game is playable without console utilization. im talking rudimentary bugs that prevents u crashing every 5 min and losing 20 hours of progress cause u realise u encountered practically unfixable bug that corrupted your save file.For a forum supposedly dedicated to "old school CRPGs", you guys sure don't seem comfortable using the console to fix bugs yourself.add 2-3 years for bug fixing and matured enough (porn) mod base.
Same can be said of Fallout 4, and that one sold great.Am I the only one who thinks this is going to bomb hard?
I just don't see what it brings to the table that No Man's Sky doesn't already provide.
As if downloading a few mods will completely transcend those games into something worth spending dozens upon dozens (or even hundreds) of hours on.If the choice is the outdated creation engine that's easily moddable and a new engine that's better looking, more stable, offers more options to the developer but it's hard to mod I would still choose creation engine since I believe Bethesda no matter the tools can't make a good game. That way at least you have hope that modders will fix it.>Refuse to stop using the creation engine.
As if downloading a few mods will completely transcend those games into something worth spending dozens upon dozens (or even hundreds) of hours on.If the choice is the outdated creation engine that's easily moddable and a new engine that's better looking, more stable, offers more options to the developer but it's hard to mod I would still choose creation engine since I believe Bethesda no matter the tools can't make a good game. That way at least you have hope that modders will fix it.>Refuse to stop using the creation engine.
the hell it isnt. skyrim sucks (mostly) but show me porn game with better writing and world building than modded skyrim. when most of your blood is in penis rather than your brain u become much less judgemental when comes to writing and plot coherence.
right now i already spend hundreds of hours on simply modding my ultimate waifu follower (incorporating hundreds of of animations and almost gig of wav sounds files) and im not even 20% done. hopefully finish before starfield tho.
fear not as impending small hat banking cartel debt ponzi scheme implosion this time will face bitcoin secured by superior extraterrestrial quantum computer that obliterated "red queen" illegal hostile ai system they build to enslave humanity and rob bitcoiners.Whites are still the majority in every Western country, but Whites are shown less than ever in advertisements, movies, and games.
Comrade, there are many bad things you could say about Bethesda but the line-up of pre-made characters represent the necessary physiognomy you would be required have in order to enjoy Starfield. I'm quite sure they have done their research extensively and was impressed by how they managed to capture the average member of the Bethesda game target audience. Johann Kaspar Lavater would be proud.
So strange how a team like Bethesda would not feature a single NPC that even resembled themselves. Its embarrassing really. If that is a look at the future Bethesda sees for humanity, It a bleak future indeed. Inclusivity means excluding the largest part of your playerbase.
I can give you a definition of RPG that is TOTALLY the real one. But I doubt many people would be able to comprehend or even just accept it since most people hate or refuse to process that they were wrong all along.Thanks for correcting us, friend! Could I bother you with asking for a definition of an RPG game so that we don't make this mistake again? Cheers!Bethesda hasn't made a RPG in more than a decade and with several other games already released.
Who knows, maybe once we're very close to the release, they delay it again.Daily reminder that we are now ONE DAY closer to Starfield's release. Don't be sad, we'll get there eventually!
i feel bad for person that wasted their energy to produce this abominable haircut and i also feel sad for wasted computing power on rendering this waste of polygons instead doing something productive like adding hashpower to bitcoin network or even playing cat video on j3wtube.Comrade, there are many bad things you could say about Bethesda but the line-up of pre-made characters represent the necessary physiognomy you would be required have in order to enjoy Starfield. I'm quite sure they have done their research extensively and was impressed by how they managed to capture the average member of the Bethesda game target audience. Johann Kaspar Lavater would be proud.
So strange how a team like Bethesda would not feature a single NPC that even resembled themselves. Its embarrassing really. If that is a look at the future Bethesda sees for humanity, It a bleak future indeed. Inclusivity means excluding the largest part of your playerbase.
Discussing which past leaks now look like they were genuine, not that riveting a topic, but there's bits and bobs in there that might be interesting to those of you speculating on what the procgen planets will be like:
Discussing which past leaks now look like they were genuine, not that riveting a topic, but there's bits and bobs in there that might be interesting to those of you speculating on what the procgen planets will be like:
Discussing which past leaks now look like they were genuine, not that riveting a topic, but there's bits and bobs in there that might be interesting to those of you speculating on what the procgen planets will be like:
Didn't Todd confirm that a lot of the planets will just be "resource rocks"?
Discussing which past leaks now look like they were genuine, not that riveting a topic, but there's bits and bobs in there that might be interesting to those of you speculating on what the procgen planets will be like:
Didn't Todd confirm that a lot of the planets will just be "resource rocks"?
Yes, they will be for mining of resources like in ME
They wont have life but they will be rewarding nonetheless
Don't know about that. Realistically speaking they do not need that much space.
I can see the argument either way. All I can offer is that it's not exactly surprising the company that made Daggerfall leans towards enormous open world areas.It would work exactly the same if the designer were to place it in a set point on one of the, say, three separate maps allocated to that specific planet, around points of interest. The advantage is that there's no need to come up with a novel system for handling an enormous open world area. Besides, functionally it amounts to the same thing, because without the vehicles you'll be teleporting via ship anyway.