Xbox |OT|

[Mnementh]

Ryuu96 said:

Mnementh said:

It also feels off, because it has not the bullshit that in my eyes make such a stuff worth it:microtransactions, lootboxes, predatory bullshit. Starfield has none of it. I can see a game that starts without this kind of shit and adds it later on through patches gets negative reviews by people that played hundreds of hours, because they are the target of this predatory bullshit. But all Starfield has is, that it may be a mediocre game, depending on your tastes and that it has the usual amount of Bethesda jank. I mean I saw in Skyrim Mammoths fall from the sky, rocks without a backside texture (making them invisible from that side) or corpses that stood upright. And I bought the game years later with millions of patches already. But nobody seems to care here. Starfield made a decision: they wanted a realistic human universe. That lead to space mostly empty and planets looking kinda samey. Because it is realisitc. Would I personally had liked an approach with a more phantastic universe more? Absolutely! But I can recognize that this was not a decision according to my tastes without it making the game bad. Do I think it was rightfully snubbed in awards? Sure, but not because it is a bottom of the barrel game, but simply because other games were better. It is not great, but definitely not the shit it seems with recent reviews.

Really liked this part, very mature take

For me I liked the realistic focus, it gave me Expanse vibes, Lol. It set itself further apart from things like Halo and Mass Effect too, it feels more "hard sci-fi" than both of those (still with a sprinkling of fantasy elements though like those two also have, Halo delving more into fantasy than the other two, Lol). But I've said it before as well, I love space and find space to be one of the most horrifying and yet beautiful things that we can see, I loved those moments in Starfield where I was in the middle of nowhere, cold vast emptiness, looking up at the sky and seeing an absolutely stunning vista.

I get that isn't for everyone though, I would accept the criticism that instead of 1000 planets they could have instead focused on a few galaxies and therefore populated more planets with colonisers and things to do. They can keep a galaxy for each major faction (United Colonies, Freestar Collective, Crimson Fleet) and also a few extra galaxies populated by stragglers or people not associated with any faction, then maybe a few galaxies not populated at all, maybe too dangerous to colonise due to weather or wildlife, instead of doing 1000 planets focusing on around 500 or so.

Didn't bother me much though, I liked how big space felt, I'd just say that I wish United Colonies, Freestar Collective felt "bigger" in reach/population, it's sort of explainable by the "leaving Earth and following wars" why humanities population seems low but still feels too small, like humanity would struggle to survive as a species this spread out and these few numbers, haha.

I have this absolutely crazy idea swimming around in the back of my head that could make me interested in this kind of game. What if we have a really big universe, mostly randomly created like No Man's Sky. Nobody knows what to expect. And at start only some systems close to the original system are settled by NPC. You can fly out into space and claim a sector to build a base if no one else did it before you. But unlike No Man's Sky you can hire or attract settlers and make your base into a settlement (No Man's Sky has settlements, but these are pregenerated and not built by you). These settlements will mine resources and produce stuff as you devise and you can start trading with the central world - or other players. Unlike No Man's Sky I would distribute resources very uneven, so trading is encouraged. Every system has *some* resources, but none has all. Main currency would be energy or an energy equivalent, as this can be produced only limited but is used up all the time. The world is running even when the player is not online, his settlement (or settlements) will keep producing, existing trade routes will keep trading. You can ally yourself with other players and you can start wars. You also can claim far-away planets. If you start your ship and stop playing for months, you reach systems months away, few other players will be near you. You can start your settlement there. Maybe other players will not notice you until they themself make such a travel.

Does this idea sound crazy? A multiplayer online world, constantly running, but players create the factions and start settle an initially empty universe.