What Starfield could have been!

https://youtu.be/57avvmqdKK8?si=LaKvof4e1RYeTat2

Is Starfield that stripped of features?

It's pretty empty. Like, crazy empty. 1000 planets and most of them are practically barren.

I might be memeing on dat 7/10 Starfield, but i will be playing it 100%, while NMS you couldn't even pay me to play that trash indie game with a fugly art direction.

Meh. Tried No Man’s Sky for a bit on Game Pass but was all that enthralled with it and stopped playing. Have been playing Starfield for a few hours and am enjoying it quite a bit.

@Archangel3371: how long has it been since you tried nms?

@sheevpalpamemes: Not long ago. Earlier this year.

No Man's Sky is fun at times, but it doesnt have story, characters, side quests, cities, etc.

NMS gives you the feeling of exploring space, Starfield gives you the feeling of exploring space that has been settled by different factions and governments and getting caught up in stories of each.

Starfield actually gives you things to do in space, I prefer that to being able to take off straight from each planet.

@Archangel3371: yeah me too, I've played NMS earlier on gamepass and didn't get the hype around it. I'm not hating on the game just to boost starfield...it's just that I didn't really enjoy the game all that much even though i absolutely loved subnautica. Starfield looks like a good time.

@sheevpalpamemes: if features you talk about include flying into and landing on planets that have basically nothing except procedurally generated content..that is useless, and doesn't really improve the gaming experience.

People still talk about one man's lie 🤣

**** that game

Everybody was harping about how great it was 4 years after it came out with the updates and I tried it. Probably one of the most boring games I've ever played. All you do is mine and scan stuff. Build base. When I played it it didn't even have any form of combat, i dont even think there were any NPCs.... I think you can shoot stuff now... But yeah this game is not for me. Will play Starfield over it any time. I actually like playing starfield.

People seem to forget NMS took how many years to get to even being a decent game.

Starfield feels like a Mass Effect game made by Bethesda, I say Mass Effect and not Fallout cause of what happens in the story is very similar to Mass Effect's story if it was just humans. I'm wandering if Bethesda/MS is trying to make Starfield their "Mass Effect" IP.

Back to NMS, even with all of the updates I can only play it for maybe 30 min before I get bored and I'm the person who loves survival games (I could probably play Ark or Conan Exiles 10 hours a day if I didn't have a kid).

The thing I like about Starfield is that--besides actually being a fully-realized game--it's a good compromise between accessible Bethesda-style open world action games and a taste of what Star Citizen is.

Compared to No Man's Sky, while it's obviously shorter on content in terms of planets, there's more meaningful stuff to do. Hours of dialogue. Tons of missions.

I love NMS and I am anxiously awaiting a fully-released Star Citizen, but Starfield is really good too and somehow seems like an amazing mish-mash of the two games that strikes the perfect balance.

Just like most planets...

Also having played the game for a good 20+ hours at this point, the planets are not empty. There's resources to harvest, random settlements and sites to scavenge, random encounters, caves, natural flora and fauna, and so on.

It's surprisingly full, but not overwhelmingly so. I'd say it's pretty close to No Man's Sky in terms of stuff to do on a planet, there's just not, you know, infinite amounts of planets like in NMS.

It's a true sandbox. They're not for everyone.

Years ago it might have been a great game for me, and I do enjoy sandbox buildings games still (city sims, factory builders, etc). But for most games I need a compelling reason to keep playing, i.e. purposeful missions, story, etc..

I appreciate NMS for what it is, and I think it's a great game, but I just can't spend the time on a game like that any more.

The performance of this game is absolutely atrocious.

"They may well look fine on your feet, but they won't keep your head dry in the rain, or your hands warm in the winter. 3/10"

If we're rating expectations, Star Citizen gets a solid 10. Since we're reviewing reality, there's a good reason it still hasn't released.

Evaluating games, films or books for what they aren't... we're skirting the absurd now.

The thing with NMS is it just doesn't feel like a universe that could exist, even with random creatures that look straight out of spore or aliens that speak nonsense to you it just feels kind of dead, Starfield sells a believable universe much more convincingly.

The updates, patches, mods and DLC content will make Starfield even better in the years to come! 😊

Every planet i have visited has geologic points,scientist research stations, and resources,build an outpost,employ people to work there,mine and use the material to upgrade.

Some people cant see the woods for the tree's

I don't get the unapologetic vitriol coming from the dark corners of the internet over this game. I'm loving Starfield personally, and you know what the best part is? The mod community is in hyper overdrive for it. The game had freaking 700 mods made for it before it even fully released. I saw they already modded everything from DLSS support to improved facial models and UI layout before I even finished downloading the game. It's the coolest thing I've seen the gaming community do since the PC community united against being forced to pay for online multiplayer.

Pretty pointless telling us Starfield could have been NMS, when in fact NMS could have been Starfield.

NMS is 10 times better now than it was at launch, but still has 10 times less stuff to do than Starfield at launch.

°I don't get the unapologetic vitriol coming from the dark corners of the internet over this game.°

100% Butthurt Sony fan people

@pcgamerlaszlo: The game is divisive because it's an exclusive. If it was multi platform, like it was going to be before MS bought it, the game would have received more 7s and 8s.

It has too many problems, exploration is lacking, constant loading screens, bugs in late game, dated gameplay and animations. It's just another Bethesda game, and after more than a decade of this "its a Bethesda Game" isn't acceptable anymore.

And Jesus the people defending Starfield are rabid. I'm talking Zelda Fanboy rabid. Listen here Starfield fanboys...if the game was the masterpiece you think it is, it wouldn't be this divisive.

The Game has problems, it's ok to like it you do you but stop trying to convince everyone the game is a masterpiece when it clearly isn't. Games like BOTW, Witcher 3, Elden Ring, TOTK all set the new standard on what Open world games can be now, and Starfield doesn't come close to setting or meeting any new standards. Heck BG3 sets the new standard for what an RPG should be and Starfield doesn't come close.

@Star67: How are the steam reviews for Starfield?

@Star67: I never once said in my post that the game was a masterpiece, just that I was having fun playing it. I love Bethesda games, alot of people still do, so I'd think "just another Bethesda game" is perfectly acceptable, especially with mod improvements right off the bat, which is why Bethesda games are loved by the PC community.

I personally haven't had any issues with load times either since my SSD has solid speeds. And for dated gameplay, animations, exploration yada yada yada, it's sitting at 87/88 on metacritic so I don't think it's as bad as projected by fanboys.

Also, As far as the hate for just being exclusive to Xbox and PC, people need to suck it up. Exclusives aren't new to gaming, so pay to play and quit bitching if that's the grind on it.

Currently 83% positive, which is decent.

If you just do Story quests (main mission, side quests, faction quests) SF is actually pretty good. The exploration is kinda boring, more so than other BGS games due to the empty randomly generated flat planets. That hurts the game, and I can see why some outlets gave it a 70%. I personally give it a 81%. The UI is atrocious though.

The game needs at least 2 players coop so bad.

@fedor: Ok, so neither divisive nor exclusive to Xbox.

Here we go with another butthurt cow making post after post after post about Starfield. Then, in an epic case of copium, you make a "I just got BG3 for PS5! So much better than anything Xbox".

Bro, you are one sad-a$$, butthurt fanboy.

@pcgamerlaszlo: @kathaariancode:

Thanks for making my point.

The rabid starfield fanboyism is getting annoying.

I hope whatever the next big game is releases soon. I'm so ready for Starfield to be in the rearview mirror.

That's probably an accurate representation of the quality of Starfield.

Starfield currently has 1 million players across all platforms.

lol

I meant "million" Sorry.

I mean what are the sales numbers for Starfield? Doesn't gamepass have like 30 million subs?

That's a pathetic attachment rate if you ask me

That's concurrent players, bro.

I included the link, jeez

It'll do so poorly on the X that they will be forced to release ES6 on the PS5 to be profitable. Pathetic.

Now prove your point by telling us which SP games managed 1 million concurrent players.

We’ll wait.

Elden Ring, Baldur's Gate 3, Cyberpunk 2077, and Hogwarts Legacy pretty much all hit ~1m concurrent players just on Steam.

I'm sure plenty more SP games have hit that number across multiple platforms / stores.

@Star67: You never had a point, but okay. If people liking things you don't like annoy you then by all means, stay bitter about it. Not my problem.

Same. 21 hours and counting.

@Nonstop-Madness: Only Cyberpunk managed 1m from your list….and yes, I’m aware Starfield was available across multiple platforms, but my point was that OP is trying to belittle a game because it has hit a figure that the vast majority of games don’t hit….and that’s laughable.

I have more than 300 hours in NMS and in my opinion Starfield is immensely more satisfying to play. Although while they do share similarities they're very different games.

There are design decisions in Starfield that are questionable, no doubt. The first few hours don't go as smoothly as one should expect from a AAA game. This is not your typical action adventure game that plays the same as 20 other games, you do have to learn how to play it and that alone will put some people off.

John from DF pointed this out and I agree with him. The issue aren't the loading times, but the lack of care in hiding them. You just get that black screen with the loading symbol. They're very fast but a transition animation, or contextual image would be great, it should feel more seamless. Kinda absurd that they felt like this was OK but it's a minor problem. Much of the loading is mostly due to qol and I'm fine with it.

Nerd annoyance, I wish the solar system was better represented. When I landed on Valles Marineris on Mars, I wanted to be in a canyon that's 8k deep, not some generic landscape. Don't get me wrong, the planets are pretty cool but I wish they put a little extra effort in the solar system.

Other than that I'm loving it so far. I love Bethesda since Morrowind times and this is a great improvement over past titles while still feeling like one of their games.

Still, have at least 100h until I know how much I like it but it will be a goty candidate. Specially because I burned out on Zelda towards the end.

BG3 I'll definitely play it but the setting doesn't really excite me, although I'm sure it will be a fantastic game. But I also wonder how much of the hype around it is due to their good marketing. I say this because we had Wasteland 3 released relatively recently, it was a superb game and no one cared for it.

@hardwenzen: Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if MS would have released starfield on PS5 at some point, once the deluxe edition released with all the mods and stuff. But after sony and crying jim went to court...well things got worse and there is no chance.

Though at the same time, business is just business. We'll see what happens.

@dabear: Where's the official numbers? 30 million gamepass subs out of how many are playing the game? And that one million is from everything? Physical, gamepass, and steam? **** with 30 million gamepass subs alone you would think it would be more than that. Are people on gamepass not playing?

@pcgamerlaszlo:Not sure what you're talking about. But Starfield fans are spending an absurd amount of time and effort to convince others AND themselves the game is good. It's annoying that's the point.

Bro, I just summarized what Phil said in a tweet. 1 million concurrent players is a big deal.

@dabear: I understand that. I get it you summarized what someone said. Cool

I'm asking everyone out there, what are the numbers for total people playing starfield. Like unique players.......with 30 million gamepass subs, steam, and physical this should be reaching Nintendo exclusive levels of attachment rate. I'm talking like 10 million.

I mean come on