Not at all. Skyrim was a groundbreaking game, for 2012, that occurred in a few small regions from several planets/planes. The praise ends there, though. If Skyrim came out as a new release in 2024, even with the remaster work and all the DLCs, I wouldn’t have nice words to say about it either. It has been more than a decade.
I mean… It can in the fun department. It can’t compete on looks, technical stability, or smoothness of feel as modern shit… But it still has a certain something that nothing else captures and keeps me coming back every couple years to play through again.
well, different strokes for different folks. could just be i like different kinds of games now - it has been a long time and my tastes have definitely changed. most of the appeal of skyrim for me is just that i love games you can mod the shit out of lol
Video games are definitely a different strokes, different folks type thing. I “play through” (never done the main quest) of vanilla skyrim ever few years. I wouldn’t even know how to download a mod for it and I still love it all these years later.
They did make a great game with that framework :) In may 2002, we got Morrowind, and not just that, they even iterated uponcthat framework slightly in the 22 years since! If you look at it today you could almost believe that the framework would be great in the late 2000s!
I think they betted on modders to do that but after a month or two when the excitement wore off and reality hit in even the most hardcore bethesda fanboys, most of the ambitious projects got cancelled and everyone went back to modding skyrim lmao
As somebody who put over 200 hours into the game before dropping it all at once and never looking back, yeah, I agree.
There really genuinely is a great framework here, enough to keep me interested and hopeful for the future for awhile, but the glaring issues are just too huge and, as you said, you have to keep people’s interest if you want the modding community to pick up the slack, and the main gameplay loop is just so goddamn boring.
edit: And yes, since I got 200+ hours out of it, tbh I still feel like I got my money’s worth from the game even if I can conclude that on the whole it’s a very mid experience.
I paid for skyrim on different platforms solid 3 times so I decided to uh, DIY myself a demo of Starfield, and after 2 weeks the charm wore off, after a month I just rushed to see what’s at the end, and uninstalled it
I think they wanted to do a wacky Rick & Morty multiverse thing with it but failed spectacularly at it because they didn’t really add enough meaningful variety (and nothing of consequence; this is a huge issue) to their cycle and also because they decided to try and be weird and coy about how they were going about it so frankly a lot of the player base doesn’t even really realize there are wacky alternative universes you can end up in. And again, importantly, nothing ever feels like it has any meaningful consequence the moment you buy into the whole Unity thing. Like I get if they want to make some kind of commentary on the futility of existence and the meaninglessness of life or cycles of violence, but if so then like… do that. It feels like they are approaching some kind of meaning or commentary that they never actually reach, so instead you just have this awful cycle where to progress you have to discard all of the things which typically make progression worthwhile in this kind of experience. It’s just full of these kind of weird fucking choices, man.
soon after Starfield I finally got around to playing Outer Wilds, and despite the fact the cycle in that game is 20min instead of like 50h+, it actually serves a vital purpose to the narrative. I’m desperately resisting devolving into a cult like worship for the next 20 paragraphs praising Outer Wilds but like - go play it if you haven’t already, it’s spectacular.
I’ve never played the game and well… don’t really know the issues about it.
Can someone explain what you mean with that it’s a great framework but not really a good game in itself and has issues?
It’s… kind of a lot to explain, but I’ll try to give you a bit. And fair warning, while I have a lot of complaints about the game, I also think a lot of the common complaints about the game are often overblown or are down-right wrong.
So first off, in terms of gameplay, it plays like Skyrim or Fallout but with more polish, which makes sense since it’s built in and running on the newer released update version of the same engine as those games. Personally I like the core gameplay of those games, so for me that’s a win but a lot of people were upset that there wasn’t some enormous leap and bound in terms of what the engine can do, as if studios like EA haven’t been pumping out cookie-cutter formulaic entries of FPS or sports games with no innovation but I digress… The motion feels vastly smoother than Skyrim and the gunplay is an enormous upgrade over Fallout’s; although there are some things to complain about in the combat, the actual physics, motion, and aiming are all solid. The perpetual nature of Bethesda universes at the scale and scope which they maintain the consistency continues to be impressive as hell, to me at least. If you haven’t played Skyrim or one of the newer Fallouts, it’s hard to articulate what sets them apart from other first-person RPGs, unfortunately, but in general I don’t have many major complaints with the core gameplay.
The story and setting are really where my comment applies. So one common problem people mention a lot is that “Starfield is empty,” which it is, but they almost always mean it the wrong way. People complain about how nearly every planet and moon is empty save for maybe a point of interest or two… but spaceisalmost completely empty. That’s one of the the things Starfield does right, and the lonely empty feeling of walking across a barren alien planet just to be welcomed with the cold expanse of nothingness is one of the best parts of Starfield. But Starfield is way too empty, the problem is that’s actually empty at the content-heavy parts. Due to story reasons Earth is uninhabited, so humanity has settled other planets… but each of the “main planets” has one city one it. ONE. Imagine if the whole of humanity’s settlement of Earth was just New York City. That’s absolute insanity. The idea that at least one or two of these planets wouldn’t have developed into sprawling developing countries across the globe instantly shatters a lot of the logic of the universe, and it’s this kind of big-picture-with-no-details thinking that seeps into everything in this game.
Another example is the shipbuilding, arguably one of the best and most well-received parts of the game. Without modding, you can’t turn any ship component 90 degrees, and you can’t even flip or invert many pieces. And when you build your ship, how the pieces actually connect (in terms of doors and hallways) is basically entirely by chance rather than being controllable or having logical rules. So you might think you’ve put together a great simple ship with a central hallway with doors along the walls on each side, only to find out that instead your ship is actually an snake-like disaster which requires you to go through every single room to get from the cockpit to the door.
There’s just a lot of lack of attention to detail stuff like that, and lot of seemingly half-filled (if even that) space for content as mentioned above with the main planets. Beyond those flaws though, there are some really great concepts to play with, such as the need for physical information couriering because technology has figured out physical faster-than-light travel via the gravity drive but not how to transmit data faster than light without a physical ship with gravity drive to do it.
Also for Fallout to have an excellent in-game radio and for Starfield to not have a ship radio is an absolutely criminal omission.
Hopefully that answers it some? I dunno, ask me if you wanna know more I guess.
I might be inclined to agree with you, if it wasnt for the absolutely atrocious amount of loading screens.
Its definitely a game where it feels like they put all their dev team effort into the first parts of the game, on the assumption that you’d be hooked enough to ignore all the rest of the bullshit, poor decisions, and bad mechanics that come later.
I think making anything of Starfield, for modders, would be such a monumentally huge task… That they could probably just do it in skyrim/fallout 4 with just a portion of the effort/stress/hassle.
If they wanted modders to save their game they shouldn’t have set half of it in vacuum so you can’t have s l o o t y armor without breaking the precious i m m e r s i o n
On the other hand, it’s pretty funny to see the cope modders are adding to explain it away.
“Uuuummmm AKSHUALLY my boob window space suit totally works because of magnetic fields” 😎
Hey, Starfield is actually a great framework for a video game; I can’t wait until they write and make an actual game to go inside of it
It really isn’t, that’s 99% of the problem. It’s basically a mod for Skyrim with some additional tech.
This implies that Skyrim isn’t a good video game. Which if was true, I don’t think Starfield would have existed.
Not at all. Skyrim was a groundbreaking game, for 2012, that occurred in a few small regions from several planets/planes. The praise ends there, though. If Skyrim came out as a new release in 2024, even with the remaster work and all the DLCs, I wouldn’t have nice words to say about it either. It has been more than a decade.
well skyrim was good in 2012, kinda hard to say it can stand toe to toe with modern titles (without mods obviously)
I mean… It can in the fun department. It can’t compete on looks, technical stability, or smoothness of feel as modern shit… But it still has a certain something that nothing else captures and keeps me coming back every couple years to play through again.
well, different strokes for different folks. could just be i like different kinds of games now - it has been a long time and my tastes have definitely changed. most of the appeal of skyrim for me is just that i love games you can mod the shit out of lol
Video games are definitely a different strokes, different folks type thing. I “play through” (never done the main quest) of vanilla skyrim ever few years. I wouldn’t even know how to download a mod for it and I still love it all these years later.
They did make a great game with that framework :) In may 2002, we got Morrowind, and not just that, they even iterated uponcthat framework slightly in the 22 years since! If you look at it today you could almost believe that the framework would be great in the late 2000s!
I think they betted on modders to do that but after a month or two when the excitement wore off and reality hit in even the most hardcore bethesda fanboys, most of the ambitious projects got cancelled and everyone went back to modding skyrim lmao
I mean the modding tools are not even out…that feels a bit of over exaggeration, like of course there is less modding going towards it.
As somebody who put over 200 hours into the game before dropping it all at once and never looking back, yeah, I agree.
There really genuinely is a great framework here, enough to keep me interested and hopeful for the future for awhile, but the glaring issues are just too huge and, as you said, you have to keep people’s interest if you want the modding community to pick up the slack, and the main gameplay loop is just so goddamn boring.
edit: And yes, since I got 200+ hours out of it, tbh I still feel like I got my money’s worth from the game even if I can conclude that on the whole it’s a very mid experience.
I paid for skyrim on different platforms solid 3 times so I decided to uh, DIY myself a demo of Starfield, and after 2 weeks the charm wore off, after a month I just rushed to see what’s at the end, and uninstalled it
This took me way too long to understand.
;)
Yeah.
I got Starfield free with my video card, and I still feel like I should be entitled to a refund for the game, lol.
I didn’t even get to the end. About the time I found out that you basically just NG+ and start over I dropped my ‘demo’ like a sack of rocks.
I think they wanted to do a wacky Rick & Morty multiverse thing with it but failed spectacularly at it because they didn’t really add enough meaningful variety (and nothing of consequence; this is a huge issue) to their cycle and also because they decided to try and be weird and coy about how they were going about it so frankly a lot of the player base doesn’t even really realize there are wacky alternative universes you can end up in. And again, importantly, nothing ever feels like it has any meaningful consequence the moment you buy into the whole Unity thing. Like I get if they want to make some kind of commentary on the futility of existence and the meaninglessness of life or cycles of violence, but if so then like… do that. It feels like they are approaching some kind of meaning or commentary that they never actually reach, so instead you just have this awful cycle where to progress you have to discard all of the things which typically make progression worthwhile in this kind of experience. It’s just full of these kind of weird fucking choices, man.
edit: typos
soon after Starfield I finally got around to playing Outer Wilds, and despite the fact the cycle in that game is 20min instead of like 50h+, it actually serves a vital purpose to the narrative. I’m desperately resisting devolving into a cult like worship for the next 20 paragraphs praising Outer Wilds but like - go play it if you haven’t already, it’s spectacular.
There is no piece of media I’d like to be able to experience for the first time again more than Outer Wilds.
if I get dementia at least I’ll be able to experience it again for the first time
I’ve never played the game and well… don’t really know the issues about it.
Can someone explain what you mean with that it’s a great framework but not really a good game in itself and has issues?
It’s… kind of a lot to explain, but I’ll try to give you a bit. And fair warning, while I have a lot of complaints about the game, I also think a lot of the common complaints about the game are often overblown or are down-right wrong.
So first off, in terms of gameplay, it plays like Skyrim or Fallout but with more polish, which makes sense since it’s built in and running on the newer released update version of the same engine as those games. Personally I like the core gameplay of those games, so for me that’s a win but a lot of people were upset that there wasn’t some enormous leap and bound in terms of what the engine can do, as if studios like EA haven’t been pumping out cookie-cutter formulaic entries of FPS or sports games with no innovation but I digress… The motion feels vastly smoother than Skyrim and the gunplay is an enormous upgrade over Fallout’s; although there are some things to complain about in the combat, the actual physics, motion, and aiming are all solid. The perpetual nature of Bethesda universes at the scale and scope which they maintain the consistency continues to be impressive as hell, to me at least. If you haven’t played Skyrim or one of the newer Fallouts, it’s hard to articulate what sets them apart from other first-person RPGs, unfortunately, but in general I don’t have many major complaints with the core gameplay.
The story and setting are really where my comment applies. So one common problem people mention a lot is that “Starfield is empty,” which it is, but they almost always mean it the wrong way. People complain about how nearly every planet and moon is empty save for maybe a point of interest or two… but space is almost completely empty. That’s one of the the things Starfield does right, and the lonely empty feeling of walking across a barren alien planet just to be welcomed with the cold expanse of nothingness is one of the best parts of Starfield. But Starfield is way too empty, the problem is that’s actually empty at the content-heavy parts. Due to story reasons Earth is uninhabited, so humanity has settled other planets… but each of the “main planets” has one city one it. ONE. Imagine if the whole of humanity’s settlement of Earth was just New York City. That’s absolute insanity. The idea that at least one or two of these planets wouldn’t have developed into sprawling developing countries across the globe instantly shatters a lot of the logic of the universe, and it’s this kind of big-picture-with-no-details thinking that seeps into everything in this game.
Another example is the shipbuilding, arguably one of the best and most well-received parts of the game. Without modding, you can’t turn any ship component 90 degrees, and you can’t even flip or invert many pieces. And when you build your ship, how the pieces actually connect (in terms of doors and hallways) is basically entirely by chance rather than being controllable or having logical rules. So you might think you’ve put together a great simple ship with a central hallway with doors along the walls on each side, only to find out that instead your ship is actually an snake-like disaster which requires you to go through every single room to get from the cockpit to the door.
There’s just a lot of lack of attention to detail stuff like that, and lot of seemingly half-filled (if even that) space for content as mentioned above with the main planets. Beyond those flaws though, there are some really great concepts to play with, such as the need for physical information couriering because technology has figured out physical faster-than-light travel via the gravity drive but not how to transmit data faster than light without a physical ship with gravity drive to do it.
Also for Fallout to have an excellent in-game radio and for Starfield to not have a ship radio is an absolutely criminal omission.
Hopefully that answers it some? I dunno, ask me if you wanna know more I guess.
I might be inclined to agree with you, if it wasnt for the absolutely atrocious amount of loading screens.
Its definitely a game where it feels like they put all their dev team effort into the first parts of the game, on the assumption that you’d be hooked enough to ignore all the rest of the bullshit, poor decisions, and bad mechanics that come later.
I think making anything of Starfield, for modders, would be such a monumentally huge task… That they could probably just do it in skyrim/fallout 4 with just a portion of the effort/stress/hassle.
If they wanted modders to save their game they shouldn’t have set half of it in vacuum so you can’t have s l o o t y armor without breaking the precious i m m e r s i o n
On the other hand, it’s pretty funny to see the cope modders are adding to explain it away.
“Uuuummmm AKSHUALLY my boob window space suit totally works because of magnetic fields” 😎
As someone who put 120 hrs in I can honestly say it isn’t. No Man’s Sky basically did it all and better beforehand.