Support NeoGAF

[vaibhavpisal]

First, outpost building - a clear area of the game that absolutely is a de-evolution from their previous two titles - is not new to SF. Second, why are you're describing gameplay activities (and some that are just naturally a part of a "space game") - we're talking about actual game mechanics. "Jet packs" is not a game mechanic. A "new skill tree" (and not a new way of doing character progression - this is still the PERK system) in a new game is not a new game mechanic.

. . .this is entire thread is essentially: how has Bethesda improved on their craft since Morrowind? I think the most supported response is, they haven't (at least not meaningfully). Contrast a studio like LARIAN who have, from DOS1 to BG3, substantially improved their storytelling and player agency abilities; what in SF demonstrates that Bethesda have improved in ANY core game design competency? There's literally one choice of any consequence in SF and it has zero impact on the thrust of the actual story. . .in a game about players discovering their own adventure. Like sure, Bethesda can throw in a bunch of new activities to do in the game (hey we've got a new lockpicking system that will replace lockpicking and hacking and somehow be more irritating), but that doesn't mean they've improved on their ability to execute.

Not gonna comment on BG3 as haven't played it.

But, they cannot improve upon their craft when they are making so much stuff that's new. If you think making a narrative system that's spread across multiple planets is nothing new, I don't know what to tell you.

Their perk system is most flexible build system out there. You don't get locked out of anything. Everything works in real time in 3d space. Testing and balancing that perk tree across wide variety of terrains and gravity values and what not, it's a herculean task.

I am not even touching physics and simulation system cause I have not played the game fully. So don't know what all you can do with it. But it is an RPG that's based on simulation system. People are looking for dialogue choices in such a game. Seriously??

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Are you playing the game yourself? Genuine question. Alot of people are giving their thoughts on the game and haven't even seen the splash screen in real time.

The game is a marvel. Truly nothing like it out there. It's literally staggering how much stuff its doing and looks good doing it, too.

Yes... have been for the last 3 days now. I have never said the game is not good. I said it's a Bethesda game. And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Its like free content for them in a dry period next year.

Wait for the articles of. "Maybe, we were too harsh on Starfield"

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Not gonna comment on BG3 as haven't played it.

But, they cannot improve upon their craft when they are making so much stuff that's new. If you think making a narrative system that's spread across multiple planets is nothing new, I don't know what to tell you.

Multiple planets that basically play out like levels in a game? I am sorry, that's nothing new. Even NMS implementation of planetary travel or planets as a whole is better.

Their perk system is most flexible build system out there. You don't get locked out of anything. Everything works in real time in 3d space. Testing and balancing that perk tree across wide variety of terrains and gravity values and what not, it's a herculean task.

Again...nothing new here, This is not the first game to have a leveling or character-building system that doesn't lock you out of anything.

And you are doing the same shit... trying to defend the game. And cant seem to see that what you are saying in its defence, arent really excuses. Nor what they are saying about the game, is really bad. If you are into it, that's fine, just don't gripe that others feel it's dated.

I mean you are actually here saying that we should accept that a team cant improve on their craft because they are making new stuff? So we should be fine paying FO4 again as long as the theme is in space and all new? Even when they have regressed in some of the systems/stuff they did since FO4?

 

[Lucifers Beard]

They lost me at defending games, grow up.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

Multiple planets that basically play out like levels in a game? I am sorry, that's nothing new. Even NMS implementation of planetary travel or planets as a whole is better.

NMS is fully procedurally generated. Nothing is hand crafted there. Not comparable really.

Again...nothing new here, This is not the first game to have a leveling or character-building system that doesn't lock you out of anything.

Which game has better character building than this? I would like to play it.

It cannot have these things:

-obscure stats like Strength, dexterity, intelligence etc that prohibit wide variety of builds.
-skill tree that lock you out of skills. You should be able to mix and match whatever you want.
-everything should work in 3d environment with realistic feedback from every skill used.

Also, how exactly has it regressed from Fallout 4?

 

[Variahunter]

Because it's the one that is being used to the run the game. You know the thing that makes the game work.

OK so you don't have any knowledge. Tales from your ass.

 

[ANDS]

Not gonna comment on BG3 as haven't played it.

But, they cannot improve upon their craft when they are making so much stuff that's new. If you think making a narrative system that's spread across multiple planets is nothing new, I don't know what to tell you.

Their perk system is most flexible build system out there. You don't get locked out of anything. Everything works in real time in 3d space. Testing and balancing that perk tree across wide variety of terrains and gravity values and what not, it's a herculean task.

I am not even touching physics and simulation system cause I have not played the game fully. So don't know what all you can do with it. But it is an RPG that's based on simulation system. People are looking for dialogue choices in such a game. Seriously??

I see where this is going. Listen, you can not make a game set in WW2 after making a game set in The Crusades and then say "Look, we've got guns now. We haven't changed anything else about the game, but this one has guns. Innovation!" Features that are induced by the game genre are not "features" - they are consequences. Like telling a story in multiple locations is not some innovative feature; it is a consequence of the game space being spread across "planets" instead of one land mass. That isn't some "ah-ha" moment of game design from Bethesda, that is literally how this has to work in a game where you traipse across multiple "planets."

Among the things you've listed the only one that you can reasonably argue is an improvement is the PERK system simply removing perk requirements; but even that is pretty superficial. You still have to grind out the skill points, and you are locked out of higher level perks without spending the prerequisite number of points in a skill tree. How is this any different functionally than it was in FO4?

 

[Chronicle]

You know we're in the millenial gen when you need to 'defend' something. Lol

 

[feynoob]

OK so you don't have any knowledge. Tales from your ass.

If you want believe the issue that is present on starfield is because of xss and not the engine. Then I have a car to sell it to you.

 

[ungalo]

I see where this is going. Listen, you can not make a game set in WW2 after making a game set in The Crusades and then say "Look, we've got guns now. We haven't changed anything else about the game, but this one has guns. Innovation!" Features that are induced by the game genre are not "features" - they are consequences. Like telling a story in multiple locations is not some innovative feature; it is a consequence of the game space being spread across "planets" instead of one land mass. That isn't some "ah-ha" moment of game design from Bethesda, that is literally how this has to work in a game where you traipse across multiple "planets."

Well don't see it as an achievement but as a quality then.

They made what they usually do in terms of worldbuilding, except it's spread out to basically the whole galaxy. I think you have to go to great lenghts to make it seem just as believable as your other games (which are only a region with handcrafted content) in the first place. Even if you don't think that, at the minimum you can admit that it's refreshing to have so much variety in the environments and different context, compared to Fallout 4 that really didn't do much in terms of big locations.

Even the whole consistancy of the world. The fact that when some NPC talk to you about something, some place, some planet, some group of people, some old battleground, you can be sure that this thing exist, it was actually created/represented in the game in some way. There are not many ways to escape it for the devs. It's not a world that you don't know about, that has no real edge, when they set their objective to basically create everything, they have to create everything.

And you can't just dismiss it like "that's just spread out man, no big deal". They created an original world, that you can see they really wanted to create, and it was a colossal work, doesn't matter from which point they started.

 

[Tomeru]

Not gonna comment on BG3 as haven't played it.

But, they cannot improve upon their craft when they are making so much stuff that's new. If you think making a narrative system that's spread across multiple planets is nothing new, I don't know what to tell you.

Their perk system is most flexible build system out there. You don't get locked out of anything. Everything works in real time in 3d space. Testing and balancing that perk tree across wide variety of terrains and gravity values and what not, it's a herculean task.

I am not even touching physics and simulation system cause I have not played the game fully. So don't know what all you can do with it. But it is an RPG that's based on simulation system. People are looking for dialogue choices in such a game. Seriously??

 

[tmlDan]

Paul Tassi, the destiny gamer who doesn't like BG3, yea, don't care for him at all and what he likes lol

Defending poor design choices and disregarding criticism is absolute bias imo. Reporters should all be able to say "I really like this game but it def has its flaws and here they are..."

 

[Kokoloko85]

Spot on lol. This is what it feels like with alot of “Journalists” and “Fans” online

 

[Nihilum]

It's a good game that needs a Mako. I mean having to walk on barren planets??? fucking Nasa put a helicopter on Mars, Todd.... ffs

 

[Spukc]

neo Stargaf

 

[ungalo]

And of course i agree with the guy (don't care who he is).

Not that i would give the game the perfect score, i'm just looking at the usual generosity of the press. Even this wack Halo Infinite has 87 on metacritic. No definitely the only one that was actually scammed is Todd.

 

[Skelterz]

I’ve never felt the need to “Defend” a game and that language in itself almost adds legitimacy to whatever negatives are being thrown at it.

Strange world we live in now gamers defending games instead of just playing what they like and not caring what people think.

 

[Gudji]

Exclusive pic of Paul Tassi getting ready for Starfield defence:

 

[Variahunter]

If you want believe the issue that is present on starfield is because of xss and not the engine. Then I have a car to sell it to you.

Listen, you want to say things, that's fine. But back it up.
Here you just look like a fanboy trying to defend MS with zero knowledge of what you're talking about.

How can you even say if it's the engine or XSS without any knowledge ? What is the fact that makes you think it's one or the other ?

Nothing. Just a tale from your ass like I said.

 

[ANDS]

I'm not gonna lie, I peaced out on the "stories across multiple planets" bit.

Well don't see it as an achievement but as a quality then.

I don't see it as either. I see most of that stuff as obvious additions given it has been EIGHT YEARS between SF and FO4 release; eight years to poll what the community wanted from FO4 and had to rely on modders to provide. Eight years to see what their peers were doing in the open world space and how to evolve the gameplay and narrative experience within a setting. Eight years to do anything but this game. Like, some of you find the game to be fine - that's legit; that doesn't mean the game has evolved and in some cases has objectively gone backwards.

They made what they usually do in terms of worldbuilding, except it's spread out to basically the whole galaxy. I think you have to go to great lenghts to make it seem just as believable as your other games (which are only a region with handcrafted content) in the first place. Even if you don't think that, at the minimum you can admit that it's refreshing to have so much variety in the environments and different context, compared to Fallout 4 that really didn't do much in terms of big locations.

FO4 puts this game to shame in terms of world building and interconnectivity. And let's get real here: no one forced Bethesda to design their space-RPG this way; they could have reigned in their scope and settled on (pun intended) maybe one or two systems with a handful of bespoke handcrafted worlds that "felt" large but were still navigable and appropriately dense. Even then it would have been a challenge to make an open world with a seamless world identity like FO4 was (and all their previous games have been). But again, that is on them to have made it work. And it is pretty arguable that they didn't here. They talked a big game about how epic this adventure was but then each faction has exactly one main city where only one is actually bigger than any of the previous cities they've done before and there are ZERO other major settlements spread out across these home planets so that everyone is concentrated in a single city in this epic space drama where we were told we could make our own way but quests are actually pretty tunnel focused and have little world reactivity. Whew. That feels "next gen" (Todd's words) to you?

Compare that to FO4 that, while imperfect, had a proper amount of content density and actually rewarded discovery (you can't actually discover anything on these planets because everything bespoke about a planet is already marked on your map and even then it's a dice roll if its actually going to be anything interesting or just more radiant question). Running from Sanctuary Hills to the Glowing Sea has more adventuring and exploration than in all of SF.

 

[feynoob]

Listen, you want to say things, that's fine. But back it up.
Here you just look like a fanboy trying to defend MS with zero knowledge of what you're talking about.

How can you even say if it's the engine or XSS without any knowledge ? What is the fact that makes you think it's one or the other ?

Nothing. Just a tale from your ass like I said.

Because you don't understand it. It's that simple.

It's documented that the engine is shit and can't do certain task. Climbing the ladder was a tough task before the engine upgrade.

 

[KungFucius]

If the game was good enough then it wouldn't need an army of defenders, it would be able to stand on its own merits and defend itself.

Right because there is no such thing as console warriors. The game is fine. It is buggy but basically is sucking me in like Fallout 4 did 8 years ago only with much better quests.

 

[Mythoclast]

People here trashing on Tassi cause he enjoys Destiny and he found BG3 boring. The majority of gamers out there will share his opinion tho. I have played both and enjoy both, I like Destiny much more than BG3.

BG3 I will only play with friends, would never play solo. It’s shameful that if the guy plays Destiny his opinion will be immediately dismissed, and that you need to drool for Baldur’s because that’s what a “tasteful” gamer will like.

Fuck Baldur’s tbh. It’s only fun when you play with friends.

And on topic, it really does seems that there’s a campaign over here to shit on Starfield. Unlike Baldur’s, I legitimately believe that it is a fun game, and one I constantly think about getting back to.

 

[Variahunter]

Because you don't understand it. It's that simple.

It's documented that the engine is shit and can't do certain task. Climbing the ladder was a tough task before the engine upgrade.

Explain it then. Why won't you explain it ?
You're a clown full of shit until you do.

 

[VideoGameEnjoyer]

Many people around here, and all corners of the internet feel similarly. For some reason.

 

[feynoob]

Explain it then. Why won't you explain it ?
You're a clown full of shit until you do.

Because the engine cant do everything. And when you have an engine that contains old engine sources, you will have tons of bugs and limitation.
Bethesda engine is not new engine like current engines. It contains elements of gamebryo engine, which was designed in the 1990s.

Look at cdpr witcher 4.

The Witcher 4: CD Projekt Explains Why It Switched to Unreal Engine 5 - IGN

CD Projekt Red has offered some insight as to why it has decided to use Unreal Engine 5 for its upcoming new Witcher saga game, rather than its in-house REDengine 4.

www.ign.com

CD Projekt Red's Art Director, Jakub Knapik, noted that thanks to Epic's collaboration with many other studios there are already many desirable features in Unreal Engine 5. "The fact that Unreal is used by a lot of teams already in the world, a lot of perspectives are projected into the design of the tools and that helps the tool to be way more agile." As such, CDPR will benefit from the ideas of other Unreal users.

Game Director Jason Slama also noted that open world games require a really solid engine due to the amount of variables and moving parts these type of games have, suggesting that Unreal Engine 5 can offer a very desirable level of stability.

"One of the things that is really important to keep in mind when talking about open-world games versus, let’s say, linear games is the possibilities of the things that can go wrong or the scenarios that you have to consider are exponentially higher than linear games," he said. "Players can go in whatever direction they want, they can handle content in any order that they want theoretically, and to really encapsulate that means that you need a really stable environment where you can be able to make changes with a high level of confidence that it’s not going to break in 1,600 other places down the line."

 

[Variahunter]

Because the engine cant do everything. And when you have an engine that contains old engine sources, you will have tons of bugs and limitation.
Bethesda engine is not new engine like current engines. It contains elements of gamebryo engine, which was designed in the 1990s.

Look at cdpr witcher 4.

The Witcher 4: CD Projekt Explains Why It Switched to Unreal Engine 5 - IGN

CD Projekt Red has offered some insight as to why it has decided to use Unreal Engine 5 for its upcoming new Witcher saga game, rather than its in-house REDengine 4.

www.ign.com

Still not explaining shit. You have literally no knowledge of what you're talking about so please stop wasting my time now.

 

[feynoob]

Still not explaining shit. You have literally no knowledge of what you're talking about so please stop wasting my time now.

Maybe you are not understanding it very well.

 

[DeaDPo0L84]

Nope. I will continue defending videogames and not getting laid. Go be a normie somewhere else.

I hope you find an Asian grill to fuck.

 

[feynoob]

I hope you find an Asian grill to fuck.

He has one in pillow form and a nice bed.

 

[SHA]

I mean, game's good but really Paul Tassi is always a clown.

Amd bubble physics, just like SF.

 

[SHA]

He has one in pillow form and a nice bed.

That shows graphics for spilling blood, who wants to sleep on this thing?

 

[Wolfpact1983]

Why bother with all the hate, it’s just a game why so mad and the most important thing; it just works.

 

[midnightAI]

I'm the opposite in a way, I was really looking forward to this game and on the surface it's everything I like in a sci-fi games, I like exploration, I like RPG's, I like Space combat, I like FPS games, and yet I find this game incredibly boring so far (about 6-8 hours in so not very far, but I have never had a game take this long to click before). Now I'm still giving it a chance, I'll keep slogging away at it in the hope that at some point it will just click but at the moment there are more things I don't like about the game than things that I do, which is a problem.