Open call for Board Member and Moderator positions in Coin Return. More information here.
Sign up to win MNC Dover's voice! Details here.
Penny Arcade - Comic - Starfeels
Dog
Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
Penny Arcade - Comic - Starfeels
Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.
+3
Posts
Watching streamers play Starfield, I'm really glad I went with BG3. Watching Starfield feels... joyless? I suspect I'd have a better time loading up Skyrim or New Vegas again. Does Starfield actually feel better in play?
It did right up until the point it randomly corrupted and erased my save files and I lost over 4 days of progress.
I'm done with Starfield.
But in all seriousness, bitterness aside, you made the right call with BG3. Having played both extensively, BG3 is much better.
I did the first part in two play sessions, ending up at the first space port. Third play session had me talk to two NPCS, then quitting after the interaction with the second NPC asked me to go fetch her a cup of space coffee.
But I have it on Gamepass, so no loss there. Maybe I'll pick at it again.
You can't give someone a pirate ship in one game, and then take it back in the next game. It's rude.
Starfield feels different and uneven. Different areas have different vibes, e.g. I had fun with a mission last night where I snuck through a guarded corporate office with a friendly hacker advising me on patrols and side paths (and occasionally opening them up or closing shutters I could be spotted through) and the other day I happened on an abandoned Zero G casino in space that was being looted and had a shootout where everyone was floating. It's the less bespoke aspects that are more lacking which unfortunately is a lot of the space stuff, both navigating in a spaceship and exploring a planet on foot/jetpack. It's struck me as doing the things No Man's Sky did well poorly (e.g. needing to use map screens to go from space to a planet's surface and not being able to fly in the atmosphere is a big downgrade from NMS's seamless transition from space to atmospheric flight to landing) but does things NMS falters in rather well (e.g. far better and more engaging ground combat and exploring buildings, better ship customization).
Oh, and there was a great Twitter thread by a game artist on why Starfield's faces look off. Parts around the eyes we expect to see move when someone smiles just don't so people look a bit dead inside.
I would say BG3 is the better game. I just needed a break from that one for a bit when I started hitting performance issues in Act 3.
Steam Profile
3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
So basically I'd be keeping my GPU (RX 5700 XT - a bit old but still solid). I tried to play Starfield and it ran, but the graphics were incredibly blurry and it froze up annoyingly often on the lowest system settings. And I don't actually care enough about this particular game to upgrade my PC or get a Series just for it, other games run fine as they're GPU bound. So I'm going to sit out this one I think. It's fine, I wasn't a big fan of Skyrim or Fallout 4 either TBH. Not really sure why, I put a lot of hours into each but I can't remember anything distinct (whereas I can remember quite a few beats of Fallout 3 and New Vegas).
Ok I guess you're right
he plays starfield...
or rodeo drive ?
I am.... OK with Starfield, it crashes to desktop about once an hour for no reason I can yet ascertain. I chalk that up to the price of playing a Bethesda game early.
But it's missing something, maybe several somethings. In Elder Scrolls and Fallout there was always the joy of finding little side quests where you least expect it. You'd stumble across a random dungeon or building or character with a quest for you and then lose yourself in it for the next hour or so. And they were everywhere. In Starfield there seem to be far fewer of those. And the procedurally generated planets are so cookie-cutter, you will literally run into the same exact building everywhere even amidst the randomly generated landscapes. All the weapons are in the same spot, enemies in same spots, secret door in same spot, etc. Even the messages on the computers are the same. At least they made the "Radiant" quests something you have to grab voluntarily off a kiosk, you don't have Preston constantly badgering you to do another one the instant you finish the last one he gave you :-(
And having to walk everywhere when you scan planets - nope. I do not buy Todd's explanation that they considered vehicles and then decided against it for various (unpersuasive) tech reasons. Setting your HUD for a point 1200 yards away means a 4-5 minute walk - so you tape down the stick or button, go read something for 5 minutes as you trudge across a barren landscape, and come back when you get there. I cannot imagine anyone finds that entertaining. Last night I got fed up and just modded my boost pack speed to fly there in 20 seconds.
Combat is too same-y, as well. 80% of your enemies are humans with guns. Maybe 15% are humans with melee weapons who charge you banzai-style (to no effect, as melee is worthless in this game). 4% are robots assisting the humans, and on rare 1% occasions you'll run into a terrormorph (Starfield's equivalent of a deathclaw in Fallout). Those are a treat, at least.
Similarly, companions are same-y too. While they're not bad characters, they're basically a small group of similar people. All of them are generally goody two-shoes, no one with an edge like Serana or Charon or Boone or Cait, and certainly no one as cool as Nick Valentine with all his flavor. They stack up quite poorly against the gang of utter freaks you pal around with in BG3, God love 'em one and all. :-)
I'm kind of in the same boat. In a lot of ways, the quality of certain aspects of these games has dropped with each release. Whether they're trying to adjust for their fanbase getting older and having less time, or they're just targeting the lowest common denominator to push sales, Bethesda games have gotten shallower and more simplified over time. A good example are the mage guilds from each game and how involved the process is in dealing with them.
As flawed as it was, I played the shit out of Oblivion. I had some fun with Skyrim, but ultimately came away disappointed, and the feeling has only grown with each game's release. I didn't finish Fallout 4, never touched 76, and right now I'm thinking Starfield might be something I'll pick up in six months on discount after some updates and a bunch of mod releases.
That pretty much makes my decision for me. I am an ardent defender of Skyrim, warts and all, because I just enjoyed the world so much. But what made it so enjoyable was being able to go into any random hole in the ground and have it be a designed space, with a story and flow and atmosphere. Even if some places were more in-depth than others, and they were all obviously made with the same toolbox, nothing felt procedurally generated. People have criticized the conveniences like lit candles and back doors, but while those might not be realistic, they made each dungeon feel like it was made intentionally to be experienced.
If there aren't places to explore that were made deliberately by a human, I can't imagine enjoying a game of that style. I like exploring, but only if there's actually something to discover.
If you like wandering and exploring and looking at pretty things, then do that. Yes there's more barren worlds than there are of the lush jungle worlds, then if thats something you like, learn to scan in skills and find them and explore Those types of planets.
If you like action hero combat, then put points in acrobatics, jetpack use, power slide, ADS, etc, and play a slide and shoot game.
If you need to fulfill your happiness with endless sidequests, then this is your game.
It's not a full salad bar, no videogame is, but it is a salad bar with things some people like. I can't play dark souls and complain about the unrealistic relationship dynamics, can i?
There's a reason why have a term "uncanny valley." No one ever said things have to be photorealistic. But if it gets most of the way there but then stops, well, there's that valley.
I think most people understand how to enjoy things. If you find people complaining, there's an implicit complaint that there's not enough other stuff that they are finding appealing to offset all those things that they don't.
But now I'm explaining basic concepts, too.
The faces aren't bad, but they're in the same league as the rest of Bethesda's games where they look like Bethesda spent little time on animating them.
Presumably you're American? This is not a global condition, I assure you.
Yeah, that's obviously absolutely unacceptable. I know it's a Bethesda game so it's going to be buggy, but I'm sorry to hear that level of issue - I'd mostly heard about it just being sort of "meh" if you're over the Fallout 3 formula.
Thanks! Sounds like a lot of previous entries in the Bethesda library, then - I found a lot of Skyrim caves where you were there to pick up some dude's hat really boring, but specific questlines could be pretty good.
And this is the ship-building in its absolute infancy, there are a ton of limitations on what you can build and how you can design your ship's looks and aesthetic. And even so, there are phenomenal interpretations of the Normandy from Mass Effect, various Star Wars ships, and even a Batwing out there :-) Once the creation kit comes out in ~6 months, insert your pun of choice (it'll take off like a rocket, the sky's the limit, etc.).
But retrofitting one I've captured is a blast.
pleasepaypreacher.net
So what you mean to say is: It's a good game if you're unemployed.
I mean, that's true for all of Bethesda's titles. Skyrim came out a few weeks after I had gotten laid off and that was convenient timing.
How long Starfield takes to get good is going to vary person to person though and that's nothing new. We talk fondly of Fallout 3 and Oblivion's openings and a bit less of Skyrim's. Starfield's is closer to Fallout 4's in a lot of ways. I'd say the biggest difference is that the intro combat section isn't as visually interesting as Fallout 4's and felt like it dragged on a bit. That does come with a caveat that I chose a background that did not start with combat skills though and I do suspect something that chose Soldier and starts out with damage bonuses and the ability to use jetpacks is going to get through it faster. A lot of us had issues with Fallout 4's opening when it was new too. Today we don't really talk much about it either way, which is not the same as being objectively bad.
Though one thing that has come up is a good number of people get killed in the introduction to space battles. Which also may color some perceptions though not necessarily in a bad way for some. A number of space battles still pretty early on in the game have felt far more challenging than what's been in a baseline Bethesda game for a very, very long time.
The first major city you get plopped into isn't necessarily to everyone's taste either which likely affects things. It's aesthetic actually doesn't mesh with the other populated areas. But it makes it clear that we're back to developed cities instead of what we had in Fallout 4.
Steam Profile
3DS: 3454-0268-5595 Battle.net: SteelAngel#1772
Yeah, I quite liked the ship building, even if it's very limited. In fact, I had just converted the Narwhal into the Vic Viper T-301 before losing all my saves (which unsurprisingly contributed to my frustration).
What's the difference to your internet between installing on an SSD and installing on a platter HDD?
I did Not like ship combat, so I avoided it until I got enough crew to make my ship respond a little better and also I found some other ships to try out to find out what the bounds are and edited a few weapons in. Putting a point into piloting Really helped too.
I started off as a professor, so my combat sucked, but eventually i found out you have to multiply the damage by the rate of fire to get the real output of a weapon (then consider range and accuracy if your interested in specific ranges). I "didnt" have to put any points in combat, i feel, but i did for ballistics just so I could ease up on it a little bit.
I hated how slow I leveled, so then I went into star systems rated for 5-10 levels higher than me (sometimes more) and any fight I got into got me huge gobs of XP, started leveling very quickly.
SSDs tend to have less space. Smaller disk space = more need to uninstall and reinstall stuff.
MHWilds ID: JF9LL8L3
Its not the size of the ssd, but uhh the size of the ssd?
pleasepaypreacher.net
That's supposed to be TB
But it's not the size of the SSD, it's what you fill it with that counts.
Because Rick & Morty is a over the top cartoon with over the top cartoony art-style. No one complains that the irises or eyeballs in say...Dragon Quest, Mario or Minecraft look fakes (well, actually some people do, but thoses are the kind of people who would play Dark Soul and complains about the relationship dynamics.)
If one of the biggest publisher around put out a game with "gritty" photo-realistic graphics, they'll be judged on that.