-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Paul Tassi: I’m not some Bethesda or Xbox superfan obviously, there hasn’t been a game I’ve wanted to “defend” like Starfield in a long time
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
"I'm just paid to do it."
Darkmakaimura
Member
Ayyyyyy sigh.
Thick Thighs Save Lives
Gold Member
Paul Tassi lul.
LectureMaster
Member
I mean, game's good but really Paul Tassi is always a clown.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
Keep in the OT or in the 77% thread and keep that active. Do the right thing.
BlackProdigy
Member
I hear him some of the terrible scores by "journalists" are downright comical. For example, Jim Sterling's review was ridiculous (a 40) lol
That Damn Kid
Member
feynoob
Banned
Barakov
Member
You've just described just about any much discussed game ever.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
You can be into games like Starfeid, but you shouldn't have to defend it. Because what people are saying about the game, is true, and it's not bad. Its a Bethesda game. It's kinda like we all know what to expect if we hear Housemarqe is making a game, or that Naughty Dog is making a game...etc.
The issue with Starfeid is that while it's a Bethesda game, it's an unevolved Bethesda game. It's like what Bethesda would have made in 2013 if they had current-gen hardware. It's like paying elder scrolls in space. But even less open because it uses a weird illusion of an open world.
All that doesn't make the game bad, it just makes it very far from what they seem to have wanted everyone to think it was going to be. Guess thats why people lie you feel it needs to be defended.
The issue with Starfeid is that while it's a Bethesda game, it's an unevolved Bethesda game. It's like what Bethesda would have made in 2013 if they had current-gen hardware. It's like paying elder scrolls in space. But even less open because it uses a weird illusion of an open world.
All that doesn't make the game bad, it just makes it very far from what they seem to have wanted everyone to think it was going to be. Guess thats why people lie you feel it needs to be defended.
Except. . .they haven't evolved. Like at all. This isn't a vague and unfair criticism, it is right there in the game. Literally none of the stuff Bethesda is good at has evolved in any kind of meaningful way with SF. At worst, they have gone backwards in some areas. In my playthrough there was zero meaningful impact of my background or character I had built on the world around me; nothing reacted to my choices in the game. Contrast with BG3 where literal areas (and of course entire questlines) will shift around the decisions you've made both narratively and personally.
Speaking of player agency, companions in this are the worst they've ever been with most companions (really all of them) expecting the player to play a certain way. For a game that's all about "be whom you want to be" there sure does feel like a malus is being put on the player for doing so. This of course ignores that they are all incredibly boring (I dare you to suffer through Sam Coe and his Daughter the entire game like I did because Sam has some pretty good ship skills) and paper thin. They're all just tropes because that's all Emil and Co. know how to write. This extends to the narrative overall; Bethesda sure loves brown and green, but the one color they refuse to play with is "grey." Everything is so on the nose and sterile in this game - it's all exactly what you would expect with zero surprises (I challenge you to be surprised on the big narrative moments in this game; I'm dumb as rocks when it comes to twists but I saw this one coming a country mile away).
Or what about the actual gameplay? Take settlements, first introduced in FO4, then exploderated in FO76 and somehow, even with the modding community showing exactly what people want, reverts back to FO4, but in pre-alpha. How in the world did they botch such an easy "time waster" activity? Your game is literally about exploration and discovery but there's no incentive to build out mankind to do so? They could have gone all in on the outpost system, to give players a reason to bother with their empty, flat and boring procgen planets - but nope. There's literally no reason to engage with the outpost system whatsoever outside of your desire to create and build. Like I was completely ready to do so, even with the narrative shortcomings, until I saw just basic design missing from this system (you can't "draw" from all storage in your base, literally a feature that they had in FO4's base game; there's no way to favorite outposts, so the already cumbersome fast-traveling is made more so when hopping between outposts you are building out; you can't break down items into their "base" resource, so you'll have a dozen or so "Sealant" from various sources, instead of just the one; quick looting doesn't actually sort by name what they contain so if you're scrounging for one resource - you can't single target resources in this by the by, another feature that was there eight years ago - good luck doing it in an efficient manner, etc.) that would make any meaningful engagement with it a miserable experience - even if there was any real reason to use it, which there isn't.
This general sense of "well enough" applies to most every other game system in this from ship combat to crafting to. . .everything. Like, this isn't the worst game ever, but this need for game journos to not only play quarterback for SF during the pre-embargo, to now - where the game is trending down the "Mostly Positive" ramp on Steam - post-release with "gamers" finally getting their say, is so bizarre. It is just wild.
. . .the constant refrain from journos is the sameness of the AAA-gaming space, and along comes the exact same Bethesda game you've played before and hoped they'd improve upon and now this is the game that needs journos jumping on Twitter to explain why "awkshully, SF is exactly the grand space opera Bethesda was making it out to be."
Speaking of player agency, companions in this are the worst they've ever been with most companions (really all of them) expecting the player to play a certain way. For a game that's all about "be whom you want to be" there sure does feel like a malus is being put on the player for doing so. This of course ignores that they are all incredibly boring (I dare you to suffer through Sam Coe and his Daughter the entire game like I did because Sam has some pretty good ship skills) and paper thin. They're all just tropes because that's all Emil and Co. know how to write. This extends to the narrative overall; Bethesda sure loves brown and green, but the one color they refuse to play with is "grey." Everything is so on the nose and sterile in this game - it's all exactly what you would expect with zero surprises (I challenge you to be surprised on the big narrative moments in this game; I'm dumb as rocks when it comes to twists but I saw this one coming a country mile away).
Or what about the actual gameplay? Take settlements, first introduced in FO4, then exploderated in FO76 and somehow, even with the modding community showing exactly what people want, reverts back to FO4, but in pre-alpha. How in the world did they botch such an easy "time waster" activity? Your game is literally about exploration and discovery but there's no incentive to build out mankind to do so? They could have gone all in on the outpost system, to give players a reason to bother with their empty, flat and boring procgen planets - but nope. There's literally no reason to engage with the outpost system whatsoever outside of your desire to create and build. Like I was completely ready to do so, even with the narrative shortcomings, until I saw just basic design missing from this system (you can't "draw" from all storage in your base, literally a feature that they had in FO4's base game; there's no way to favorite outposts, so the already cumbersome fast-traveling is made more so when hopping between outposts you are building out; you can't break down items into their "base" resource, so you'll have a dozen or so "Sealant" from various sources, instead of just the one; quick looting doesn't actually sort by name what they contain so if you're scrounging for one resource - you can't single target resources in this by the by, another feature that was there eight years ago - good luck doing it in an efficient manner, etc.) that would make any meaningful engagement with it a miserable experience - even if there was any real reason to use it, which there isn't.
This general sense of "well enough" applies to most every other game system in this from ship combat to crafting to. . .everything. Like, this isn't the worst game ever, but this need for game journos to not only play quarterback for SF during the pre-embargo, to now - where the game is trending down the "Mostly Positive" ramp on Steam - post-release with "gamers" finally getting their say, is so bizarre. It is just wild.
. . .the constant refrain from journos is the sameness of the AAA-gaming space, and along comes the exact same Bethesda game you've played before and hoped they'd improve upon and now this is the game that needs journos jumping on Twitter to explain why "awkshully, SF is exactly the grand space opera Bethesda was making it out to be."
ReBurn
Gold Member
Who said anything about an army?
feynoob
Banned
That is the problem with modern gaming.
Some companies are stuck in the past and are unwilling to take the leap to the next level.
Then there is the early game issues, which companies fix the game later.
Starfield problem is that it has outdated engine which is holding the game back alot.
The game has too much potential, but because the engine is old, Bethesda can't utilize all those potential.
Seamless world is hard. Vehicle engine is nightmare on creation engine. Bigger maps is hard, because the engine can't hold 2 cells together.
They seriously need to get rid of that shit engine. But because Bethesda is stuck in the past, they don't want to do that. And that is the main issue here. They want to die on that engine and don't want to move forward like other devs.
Evil Calvin
Afraid of Boobs
Well kind of ironic that Jimbelina who obviously has issues, is pointing out issues in this epic game.
feynoob
Banned
Does Jim opinion matter at this point? That guy went to the rabid hole.
He used to do good job before, but these days not so much.
Guilty_AI
Member
The best take i've heard so far was one guy who said it was basically impossible for Starfield to unconditionally deliver.
Bethesda has been getting hate for more than a decade. First Fallout 4 wasn't very well received, then they released the abomination know as Fallout 76, then they get bought by Microsoft which isn't exactly know for being loved by the people.
Amidst all that hate they decide to launch a new IP with some different takes and ideas. Unless they released a generation defining game - which they certainly couldn't - the game would be destined to get hate. People were going to scrutinize this, and unfortunately for Bethesda Starfield does have a lot of issues that can scrutinized.
Starfield is a normal Bethesda game, it may even improve in some aspects from previous titles, however Bethesda isn't in the same position in regards to public opinion as when they released Skyrim, and neither is the gaming landscape.
Bethesda has been getting hate for more than a decade. First Fallout 4 wasn't very well received, then they released the abomination know as Fallout 76, then they get bought by Microsoft which isn't exactly know for being loved by the people.
Amidst all that hate they decide to launch a new IP with some different takes and ideas. Unless they released a generation defining game - which they certainly couldn't - the game would be destined to get hate. People were going to scrutinize this, and unfortunately for Bethesda Starfield does have a lot of issues that can scrutinized.
Starfield is a normal Bethesda game, it may even improve in some aspects from previous titles, however Bethesda isn't in the same position in regards to public opinion as when they released Skyrim, and neither is the gaming landscape.
ShaiKhulud1989
Gold Member
At this point GAF has more Starfield threads than actual Starfield man-made quests. Sheesh.
Also, Tassi is a clown, breaking news at 11.
P.S. I've enjoyed the game for what it is (a solid 7.5/10), but a subsidary of a 2 trillion dollar company hardly need any sort of defence force.
Also, Tassi is a clown, breaking news at 11.
P.S. I've enjoyed the game for what it is (a solid 7.5/10), but a subsidary of a 2 trillion dollar company hardly need any sort of defence force.
Last edited:
kazuyamishima
Member
Paul “MS pays me but I’m not fan of them” Tassi.
ShaiKhulud1989
Gold Member
The sad part? Those takes are usually free-of-charge. Tassi just capitalizing on Copium-ifused ffans like the SF's subreddit as he always do.
ByWatterson
Member
Except Days Gone stood out because it was so markedly below Sony's usual quality (even though I liked it!).
Starfield stands out because Microsoft needed a huge win, this was meant to be it, and it's...fine.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Genuinely curious: other than the obscene modeling and character work they brought to the table (which is insane; all I could think of running through some of these copy-pasted buildings and talking to the mainstory NPC's was "My god - how amazing would Fallout look with this fidelity"), how has SF at all improved on anything Bethesda has done post Morrowind?
. . .people can harp on FO4 all they want, but at a minimum the sense of discovery and exploration, of starting out on a quest and then finding yourself on something completely different (a paraphrased line from their summer showcase, but exactly how I felt playing ANY Beth game before this) was front and center there. Here it is just an illusion (and no, random ship encounters do NOT cut it).
Cornbread78
Member
Oh Paul, go ahead buddy, join the defence party
squarealex
Member
So, What If The PS5 Costs $600 Now?
The Xbox Series X was priced at $500 via different leak, also releasing on November 10.www.forbes.com
A $500 PS5 Is Now Inevitable, But For Which Model?
We should know the price of at least one of Sony's two PS5 models already.
Eventually PS5’s Exclusives Alone May Not Be Enough Against Xbox
Sony's PS5 even is later today. It will likely be good news for fans. But long term, Xbox is making moves.
Sony’s New PS5 Pre-Order Update Sounds Somewhat Ominous
Sony has given an update on PS5 pre-orders but it does not sound terribly reassuring.
Xbox Series X Has Made A Better First Impression Than PS5 So Far
I keep running into PS5 issues while the Xbox Series X has been much smoother in this first week here. What's going on?
Sony Literally Cannot Match Microsoft’s Massive Bethesda Deal, Nor Do They Need To
Sony, while a huge player in the video game console space, is in no financial position to make a deal anywhere close to as big as this Microsoft purchase of Bethesda.
A Narrative Of Sony And PS5 As ‘Anti-Consumer’ Is Starting To Take Shape
Sony is in a strong position with the PS5, but it's starting to feel like they know that a little too well.
The Case For And Against Microsoft Buying SEGA For Xbox
Could Microsoft buy SEGA for the Xbox brand? What would they get out of it?
PS5’s Spider-Man: Miles Morales Is ‘Short’ And People Are Mad
Reviews are saying that Spider-Man: Miles Morales on PS5 may not be that long, but that shouldn't be a bad thing.
‘Godfall’ PS5 Reviews Are Coming In, And They Are Not Amazing
The day before the launch of the PS5, one of its highest profile console exclusives has had its embargo lifted, and at least so far, reviews are not looking that great for Godfall.
‘Godfall’ Is The Perfect Xbox Game Pass Game, Which Presents An Obvious Problem
Godfall feels like it would have been a win for Xbox Game Pass, but on PS5, it's more of a gamble at a high price.
After ‘Godfall,’ ‘Outriders’ Promises No Recycled Content In Endgame
Outriders feels like it's taking a pretty direct shot at Godfall, promising an endgame with no recycled content.
Here Are Best And Worst Scored PS5 Games For Its Launch Window
Here are the best PS5 games at the moment here in this early launch window. And the worst ones too.
‘Everything Is Sold’ As PS5 Supply Becomes An Issue Heading Into Black Friday
If you’ve had a hard time getting your hands on a PS5 to date, chances are things are not going to be any easier, and it seems like Sony may be running out of stock to release in general.
ShaiKhulud1989
Gold Member
That is busy with BG3 and doing totally fine, believe me. It's not like PS owners are robbed out of one of the best RPGs of the decade or anything.
(lol he deleted his post)
Last edited:
freefornow
Gold Member
Everything Forbes and gaming!
gokurho
Member
He looks Sony superfan
feynoob
Banned
‘Starfield’ Review (PC): It Is What You Wanted It To Be
Bethesda's Starfield is everything fans want it to be, where you can chart your own course across the galaxy in a universe full of beauty, gunfights and secrets.
www.forbes.com
Considering he gave the game 9.5/10, you wonder why.
Batiman
Banned
I didn’t delete it. It got deleted.
Someone that’s interested in SF isn’t necessary interested in BG3. And vice versa. That point is irrelevant.
Exclusives are more prone to negativity in general.
Last edited:
Freelance Yakuza
Member
Who is this person and why his tweets are thread worth?
FalsettoVibe
Member
nvm
Last edited:
Holy smokes, Batiman. Who would do such a thing?
