| Ryuu96 said: I've seen this thrown around by many and I'm starting to fully agree with it, Starfield is like a modern day evolution of Mass Effect 1, it's at least a way better comparison than fucking No Mans Sky, Everspace, Elite Dangerous, etc. Lol. Starfield feels very much like Bethesda's typical sandbox blended with Mass Effect 1, before Mass Effect went all pew-pew Hollywood (I still loved Mass Effect 2/3 but they were very different in tone). The sense of exploration, humanities beginning steps into the stars, the sense of wonder and mystery, the uneasy but beautiful feeling of navigating the stars, exploring planets. They're close enough on a technological level as well, the only thing Starfield misses is the intelligent alien life co-existing with humanity but it very much matches the same tone/vibes of Mass Effect 1 for me. I cannot fathom how anyone can give this less than an 8, but hey, everyone has an opinion. I think some of the complaints are a clash of perspectives too, I think space is one of the most beautiful, scary, mysterious things and I'm fascinated by it. There are others who will be like "what's the point in exploring the stars?! It's just a bunch of dead planets! They do nothing! Space is boring!" and I cannot see things from that perspective at all. |
Eh honestly I see the NMS comparisons. You can basically do a lot of the stuff in NMS here outpost building, looting resources, cargo hauling, fighting alien creatures, upgrading your ship, space battles etc. These games just to the space exploration and landing bits much better because Bethesda went for more of a realistic approach like it takes hours to fly to a planet and explore one fully. These games are doing a lot of the same things but the major difference is how Bethesda handled the fast travel and loading screens and there's a meaty single-player campaign and side quests.
