Starfield has broken some fanboys' brains.  I just don't get it.  It's not sacrilege to try the game out and - maybe - really enjoy it.

Lol bro said the beginning of the game was "horrendous"

This is hilarious and so good that even I was like "wait, Linn tells you to burn bodies?" Lmao. Had me for a split second thinking I missed a dialogue choice. Also this dude didn't play Skyrim either, you don't fight a dragon at the start of Skyrim, you literally run away from it because it's fucking Alduin, Lmao.

Lol, it's just different pacing from Skyrim, that is it. Skyrim throws you into chaos almost immediately, you start on a prison transport wagon, then your head is on the executioners block, then a dragon attacks out of nowhere and you're running around dodging flames, then sneaking through the prison dungeon. Starfield starts slower with you just mining, but the action heats up pretty quickly when the pirates follow Barrett to the mining facility. It's by no means bad writing, it's just slower pacing, I appreciate the slower opening personally, I thought it was nice for them to mix things up a bit after both Skyrim and Fallout 4 had more hectic openings. 

Also.

Oh yikes, I just saw Jim Sterling gave Starfield 4/10 and tanked it's Meta down another point to 85. Sterling has fallen into complete irrelevancy and is just doing clickbait these days I see, how sad.

When you make hating a plastic box your entire personality. “Skyrim has you fighting a dragon” no sir it has the meme ride on rails followed by running away from a dragon. I just can’t with these PlayStation peeps XD

Lol checked out his video to see how anyone can give this game a 4/10. One of his arguments was that there’s no regenerative health like Call of Duty and that you have to use skill points to increase your capacity. What a joke. This is an RPG.

double post

They gave TotK a 7/10 as well

Anyway the review is a weird one because it's basically like "Bethesda has sucked since Fallout 3"

While Starfield’s galaxy is nebulously “big,” its vast array of barren planets populated by recycled assets is absolutely no justification for what this thing truly is - just another buggy Bethesda game following an ancient blueprint that hasn’t evolved creatively or mechanically since Fallout Fucking 3.

On a fundamental level, Starfield plays exactly like any other Bethesda game, only with features borrowed - and subsequently lessened – from No Man’s Sky and The Outer Worlds.

The same rudimentary combat (only without VATS to wallpaper over how sloppy it is). The same archaic approach to exploration and questing. The same stilted dialog propelled by non-sequitur exchanges. The same moronic A.I. and robotic animations. The same old narrative cliches in a world of cardboard where every stranger tells you their life story and immediately trusts you with sensitive tasks for seemingly no other reason than the fact you’re a videogame protagonist and they somehow know it.

It’s the sheer lack of imagination that truly makes Starfield so sad to play. It’s a game that can’t envision doing anything other than regurgitating the same formula its predecessors beat to death, repeating not just the things that worked but every single mistake as well, regardless of any improvements the medium's seen since The Elder Scrolls IV was new.

If you’re the kind of person who thinks videogames peaked with Fallout 3's launch version and they’ve required neither evolution nor improvement since, this game is absolutely for you. If you believe Bethesda doesn’t need to exhibit growth as an artistic outlet and hasn’t had to change a thing about the way it’s made games since 2008, I can safely say you’ll adore Starfield because it’s all that a Bethesda game has always been... and literally nothing more.

Then their Fallout 4 review, Lol.

I don't think their score is really about Starfield...But it's W/E.

I'll take this opportunity to say again that I avoid almost all of Youtube content creators, Lol.