Starfield Thread - Shattered Space expansion coming September 30th

[MjKorz]

Then, with Fallout 4, Bethesda opted to completely redesign the system, seemingly with no actual vision beyond some sort of perceived sleekness or elegance.

Oh, they had a vision: popamolization of the franchise so that it would become accessible to the most genre-ignorant casuals. In a way, they succeeded, because Fallout 4 sold very well.

I don't think that Fallout 3 is any more accessible than Fallout 4 (save deathclaws being trivialised in 4). Both games are impossible to fuck up on the default difficulty. It's not like playing Icewind Dale. The reason FO4 sold well is probably because FO3 sold well, and in the time since FO3 the gaming industry has doubled or tripled or quadrupled in revenue. It's all marketing and the allure of bottomless content. Also, people are more receptive to tricky games nowadays. Depending on how you play it, Elden Ring is one of the most difficult games ever released. It's also staggeringly popular. Even Fortnite has a high skill ceiling

Fallout 4 literally gives you power armor at the start of the game along with a minigun and has you fighting deathclaws. It was definitely a notable bump in the franchise's popamolization compared to 3.

 

[Bulo]

FromSoft has been iterating the same gameplay formula for decades now. Bethesda seem to throw away their work after each game and begin again from scratch. Compare New Vegas's iteration on Fallout 3's skill/perk systems versus Fallout 4's. Obsidian took the existing system and expanded it in order to broaden and deepen the sandbox. Then, with Fallout 4, Bethesda opted to completely redesign the system, seemingly with no actual vision beyond some sort of perceived sleekness or elegance. The senior designer responsible (who has hence retired) recalled the development process: Bethesda needed a new perk system, they dropped the problem in his lap; he made something that looked good to his eye (because he was working on it alone) and sent it out. Seal of approval. Problem solved!

Backwards. Just backwards

Okay, but that's just an anecdote, it doesn't actually get into what's wrong with F4's perk system. If you just compare the perks themselves, F4 isn't all that different from F3 or Vegas. Perks have level and attribute requirements and you get one point to spend per level (in line with 3, but admittedly not NV). Generally, people will point to the removal of skills as the biggest problem with F4's leveling, but what's funny about that is the ease of maxing out all skills and being a minor deity was a common criticism of 3 and NV which 4 successfully fixed by a combination of streamlining and then slowing progression.

It's no great tragedy, but I do think that it was ultimately a step backwards. It isn't nearly as elegant as it looks at first glance. In integrating skills into perks, you lose the granularity of skills and skill-based checks while relegating a greater number of perks to mere fractional improvements in ability (e.g. You shoot guns 15% betterer!), which I find unsatisfying. It divests perks of their significance, or at least their perceived significance. The little thrill that you feel when unlocking some new roleplay or gameplay niche that is in tune with your character or build. Yes, these fractional improvement perks were present in Fallout 3, but you would never choose them, because there was always a more interesting one to take. The same can't be said for Fallout 4. In Starfield it's even worse. It's like they're in a death spiral

 

[Bulo]

Fallout 4 literally gives you power armor at the start of the game along with a minigun and has you fighting deathclaws. It was definitely a notable bump in the franchise's popamolization compared to 3.

That spectacle, while extremely gay and dishonest, doesn't represent the rest of the game. Fallout 3 and 4 are essentially the same in terms of gameplay. It's just Oblivion with guns (go here, stab bandits/shoot raiders)

 

[Butter]

The only good thing about Fallout 4's perk system is that you can pull up the sheet at any time and plot out your build. But that's not inherent to the system. That's just a QoL thing that none of the previous games had. It's actually a terrible UX, because you can't see all the perks at one time, so you constantly have to scroll up and down, and you can't see a perk's name unless you hover over it, so you spend way longer than is necessary just finding the perk you want to buy.

 

[ind33d]

FromSoft has been iterating the same gameplay formula for decades now. Bethesda seem to throw away their work after each game and begin again from scratch. Compare New Vegas's iteration on Fallout 3's skill/perk systems versus Fallout 4's. Obsidian took the existing system and expanded it in order to broaden and deepen the sandbox. Then, with Fallout 4, Bethesda opted to completely redesign the system, seemingly with no actual vision beyond some sort of perceived sleekness or elegance. The senior designer responsible (who has hence retired) recalled the development process: Bethesda needed a new perk system, they dropped the problem in his lap; he made something that looked good to his eye (because he was working on it alone) and sent it out. Seal of approval. Problem solved!

Backwards. Just backwards

Okay, but that's just an anecdote, it doesn't actually get into what's wrong with F4's perk system. If you just compare the perks themselves, F4 isn't all that different from F3 or Vegas. Perks have level and attribute requirements and you get one point to spend per level (in line with 3, but admittedly not NV). Generally, people will point to the removal of skills as the biggest problem with F4's leveling, but what's funny about that is the ease of maxing out all skills and being a minor deity was a common criticism of 3 and NV which 4 successfully fixed by a combination of streamlining and then slowing progression.

It's no great tragedy, but I do think that it was ultimately a step backwards. It isn't nearly as elegant as it looks at first glance. In integrating skills into perks, you lose the granularity of skills and skill-based checks while relegating a greater number of perks to mere fractional improvements in ability (e.g. You shoot guns 15% betterer!), which I find unsatisfying. It divests perks of their significance, or at least their perceived significance. The little thrill that you feel when unlocking some new roleplay or gameplay niche that is in tune with your character or build. Yes, these fractional improvement perks were present in Fallout 3, but you would never choose them, because there was always a more interesting one to take. The same can't be said for Fallout 4. In Starfield it's even worse. It's like they're in a death spiral

starfield's perk system is the best I've ever seen in a video game, you can literally throw a dart at a sci-fi character and recreate his build by level 60

 

[MjKorz]

That spectacle, while extremely gay and dishonest, doesn't represent the rest of the game. Fallout 3 and 4 are essentially the same in terms of gameplay. It's just Oblivion with guns (go here, stab bandits/shoot raiders)

The rest of the game includes easy and fixed (i.e. non level-scaling) access to even more powerful pieces of power armor and weapons in low danger locations. Fallout 4 absolutely does follow the trend of franchise casualization relative to 3. Being "essentially the same" in terms of gameplay mechanics doesn't mean the game systems and character progression are not simplified.

 

[Bulo]

That spectacle, while extremely gay and dishonest, doesn't represent the rest of the game. Fallout 3 and 4 are essentially the same in terms of gameplay. It's just Oblivion with guns (go here, stab bandits/shoot raiders)

The rest of the game includes easy and fixed (i.e. non level-scaling) access to even more powerful pieces of power armor and weapons in low danger locations. Fallout 4 absolutely does follow the trend of franchise casualization relative to 3. Being "essentially the same" in terms of gameplay mechanics doesn't mean the game systems and character progression are not simplified.

True, it's worse. Not by leagues, but it is worse. I don't necessarily believe that it reflects anything about the audience though. I think it's just developer degeneration/retardation. Fallout 4 would likely have sold the exact same number of copies if they had simply tacked the cute new Vault Boy graphics onto the old system

 

[Bulo]

starfield's perk system is the best I've ever seen in a video game, you can literally throw a dart at a sci-fi character and recreate his build by level 60

Yeah I love being forced to take multiple perks that I neither want nor need in order to unlock those that I do want

 

[Gargaune]

Okay, but that's just an anecdote, it doesn't actually get into what's wrong with F4's perk system. If you just compare the perks themselves, F4 isn't all that different from F3 or Vegas. Perks have level and attribute requirements and you get one point to spend per level (in line with 3, but admittedly not NV). Generally, people will point to the removal of skills as the biggest problem with F4's leveling, but what's funny about that is the ease of maxing out all skills and being a minor deity was a common criticism of 3 and NV which 4 successfully fixed by a combination of streamlining and then slowing progression.

I agree with this, Fo4's progression chart gets more stick than it deserves. It still has core attributes, passive improvement skills (e.g. Rifleman, Locksmith), and special features (e.g. Penetrator, Cannibal), they're just all mixed in and pulling from the same resource (per-level perk points). There's certainly less granularity, but it's not that big a loss when you consider that even on a 100 scale system, people tend to pump weapon skills by large values anyway and skill checks often fall back on major breakpoints.

Its biggest problem is the unchecked level range which lets you become Jack of All Trades, Master of Fucking Everything, as usual with Bethesda. What I've found is that if you use a level cap mod to limit progression to something like 35, suddenly the system gets much more interesting. It won't set the world on fire or anything, but its options and point-buy approach are a lot more stimulating than whatever the hell was going on in Skyrim.

As for Starfield, I wouldn't know, but the early promo stuff about "unlock thing and then go grind a million space bear asses to get thing" seemed like insipid busywork and the worst of both worlds. Kinda checked out right there.

 

[Silverfish]

In integrating skills into perks, you lose the granularity of skills and skill-based checks

That's a result of the dumbed-down dialogue interface and reduced in-world skill checks though and not downwind of the perk overhaul. There's nothing in the system itself that prohibits something more like New Vegas, where you'd check against perk ranks rather than skill numbers.

The little thrill that you feel when unlocking some new roleplay or gameplay niche that is in tune with your character or build.

That's still present in F4. I'd argue that because the perks that replace skills from previous games have unimpressive percentage-based increases, it's generally more beneficial to take a few of the more exotic perks early-on anyway. 20% more gun damage when guns are sitting around 15-20 damage to start isn't all that critical.

Its biggest problem is the unchecked level range which lets you become Jack of All Trades, Master of Fucking Everything, as usual with Bethesda.

True, but you'd have to pour an insane amount of time into the game to reach that point assuming you don't know ahead of time about all the ways to increase xp gains. Leveling slows down considerably once you get to around 50, so while you certainly can become a master of all, it's a lot more difficult compared to the two preceding games.

 

[Late Bloomer]

Fallout 4 literally gives you power armor at the start of the game along with a minigun and has you fighting deathclaws. It was definitely a notable bump in the franchise's popamolization compared to 3.

Power Armor with a single fusion core (There is a fusion core in a cave nearby that is missed by most people who I have watched play) A minigun that expends most of it's ammo during the deathclaw fight (unless you lower the difficulty) It has you fight a single deathclaw not deathclaws. All the other deathclaw spawns are much further away. The entire scene is to create a moment of excitement and fun.

 

[Silverfish]

The minigun is also a horrible weapon unless you're going for a super niche build combining the basher perk and a shredder mod on the gun itself.

 

[ind33d]

Creator Interview

Honestly, I'm in for this. Beth shipping a 7/10 game and offering really strong modding tools is probably going to end up as a better product than if they just increased the budget and tried to do everything themselves. It's obvious Bethesda were under some kind of censorship regime: no evil companions, no gore, no ayys, etc. Hopefully modders are more free to make controversial content

 

[Late Bloomer]

Honestly, I'm in for this. Beth shipping a 7/10 game and offering really strong modding tools is probably going to end up as a better product than if they just increased the budget and tried to do everything themselves. It's obvious Bethesda were under some kind of censorship regime: no evil companions, no gore, no ayys, etc. Hopefully modders are more free to make controversial content

Starfield is a lost cause. No modders will create anything worthwhile. The only way to enjoy Starfield is if you are a homo, black, or both.

 

[ind33d]

Honestly, I'm in for this. Beth shipping a 7/10 game and offering really strong modding tools is probably going to end up as a better product than if they just increased the budget and tried to do everything themselves. It's obvious Bethesda were under some kind of censorship regime: no evil companions, no gore, no ayys, etc. Hopefully modders are more free to make controversial content

Starfield is a lost cause. No modders will create anything worthwhile. The only way to enjoy Starfield is if you are a homo, black, or both.

>"The only way to enjoy Starfield is if you are a homo, black, or both. 10/10" IGN

starfield game of the year edition is going to have some insane box quotes

 

[Vic]

Bethesda seem to throw away their work after each game and begin again from scratch. Compare New Vegas's iteration on Fallout 3's skill/perk systems versus Fallout 4's. Obsidian took the existing system and expanded it in order to broaden and deepen the sandbox. Then, with Fallout 4, Bethesda opted to completely redesign the system, seemingly with no actual vision beyond some sort of perceived sleekness or elegance.

The strength of Bethesda games are their crafted open worlds. Fallout 4 is peak in terms of "environmental story telling". If you enjoy going really slow and looking at every item and inside of every container, it really nails this type of gameplay down well. So many hidden, hand placed items everywhere, that also tell stories in many cases.

Starfield had that only in the few handcrafted locations. And there are a couple of them. First being the crashed ship you encounter right at the beginning of the game. I thought that was really good and how the rest of the game would be. Turns out most of the locations are AI generated and boring.

I'm positive they will add new handcrafted content with the DLC, so that might be good for another couple hours.

 

[Vic]

The rest of the game includes easy and fixed (i.e. non level-scaling) access to even more powerful pieces of power armor and weapons in low danger locations. Fallout 4 absolutely does follow the trend of franchise casualization relative to 3. Being "essentially the same" in terms of gameplay mechanics doesn't mean the game systems and character progression are not simplified.

If you think FO4 was easy play it on Survival. A lot of these complaints are obviously fair but it feels more like players shitting on the game for not being what they want it to be. Perks, quests, role playing, etc. yes that's shit in FO4 but it also has its strengths like the environmental story telling, outpost building, survival difficulty, being able to mod your power armor. In general I felt like the level design was top notch in FO4. Boston felt like a post apocalyptic war zone filled with super mutants & co. And the DLCs enhanced the game even more.

 

[Vic]

 

[Silverfish]

Why'd you leave out the best skeleton story?

 

[Bulo]

Fallout 4 is peak in terms of "environmental story telling".

A woman living in the cobwebbed ruins of a diner, sleeping on broken glass next to literal skeletons TWO HUNDRED YEARS after the apocalypse isn't peak anything. It's retarded, as are you

 

[Vic]

A woman living in the cobwebbed ruins of a diner, sleeping on broken glass next to literal skeletons TWO HUNDRED YEARS after the apocalypse isn't peak anything. It's retarded, as are you

So, you don't know what environmental storytelling means and decide to call people retarded. Great, what more is there to argue about?

 

[Silverfish]

A woman living in the cobwebbed ruins of a diner, sleeping on broken glass next to literal skeletons TWO HUNDRED YEARS after the apocalypse isn't peak anything. It's retarded, as are you

Yeah, there's no way the drug dealers she was fending off might have ever tried ransacking the place. They're famously easygoing.

 

[Bulo]

A woman living in the cobwebbed ruins of a diner, sleeping on broken glass next to literal skeletons TWO HUNDRED YEARS after the apocalypse isn't peak anything. It's retarded, as are you

Yeah, there's no way the drug dealers she was fending off might have ever tried ransacking the place. They're famously easygoing.

Oh, yes, the more logical assumption is that the diner's windows persisted through nuclear armageddon and two hundred years of turmoil only to be ungraciously bricked by some local thugs. They also stole the beds and... posed some skeletons about the place?

A woman living in the cobwebbed ruins of a diner, sleeping on broken glass next to literal skeletons TWO HUNDRED YEARS after the apocalypse isn't peak anything. It's retarded, as are you

So, you don't know what environmental storytelling means and decide to call people retarded. Great, what more is there to argue about?

I'm only calling you retarded, and no one else, because you are. You've proven it over so many pages in this thread. I gave you the benefit of the doubt for a while, but now the gloves are off

 

[Bulo]

On a more positive note, I think my favourite piece of Bethesda environmental storytelling™ is the trenches outside the Capitol Building. I don't know who built them. I don't WANT to know who built them. But they perfectly juxtapose the nation's capital

 

[FrostRaven]

Fallout isn't about making sense, but people living in buildings without roofs, next to unlooted stuff and surrounded by garbage 200 years later.... it's kind of dumb, yes.

There is a TV show called Into the Badlands (it's pretty awesome, postapocalyptic with Wuxia action) that also doesn't make sense as a setting very much, but it has a great idea: civilization has rebuilt in in its own way, but the artifacts of the past are mined from huge mounds of rubble, like collapsed buildings and warehouses. You could have scavenging looting abandoned mines like these in FO4, digs where the miners were killed by monsters or raiders, loot brought to other locations by traders, and so on.