Balducci30
Member
This looked bad to you?Grateful for the new avatar.
Introducing Craig 2.0
This looked bad to you?Grateful for the new avatar.
Introducing Craig 2.0
I think it said 'console launch exclusive' which would mean only timed. And thats a bit strange as there were heavy rumours, that one of the devs themselves said on Steam, that Microsoft were now funding the game, or at least part funding. Thats why the game had big delays as the orig plan was to release in 2 parts, but MS gave them money to finish the game as one finished game.Man Scorn looks amazing
Is it console exclusive to MS?
it also looks fine to me , i just wanted to share that the details on her face is much better than from what that user shared. looks like some low bitrate 1080p captureLooks fine to me, and 10 times better in motion. Its the animation that make it.
Honestly i dont think there is a videogame out today you couldnt do the same thing with when talking actually gameplay talking, not some cutscene.
Framerate will be polished last, frankly it's probably the least of their worries for the devs.I was surprised that the framerate was under 30fps the majority of the time, which was disappointing, however one silver lining to that is that because it had sub 30fps its likely its down to code issues rather then compute, because if compute was an issue they could of just ran it on a 3090 and brute force it.
Nah by Bethesda standards, the npc's looked great, and the facial animation was very good. That guy with the tatoos on his face talking about visions was cgi quality.
The voice acting from the pirate enemies was incredibly wooden and forced imo.Explore 1,000s of completely barren planets to pick up something for someone living in a great looking outpost. Rinse, repeat. On the up side I thought the voice acting sounded pretty good and I like the art style to a degree.
Still, it's coming to gamepass.I think it said 'console launch exclusive' which would mean only timed. And thats a bit strange as there were heavy rumours, that one of the devs themselves said on Steam, that Microsoft were now funding the game, or at least part funding. Thats why the game had big delays as the orig plan was to release in 2 parts, but MS gave them money to finish the game as one finished game.
Why do people keep saying this?
No mans sky, elite dangerous, star citizen...
Hell, even Elite 2 on the commodore amiga has a larger number of systems and planets to visit
How is it "unreal"? Genuinley baffled as to why I keep seeing people say this
Hell, even Elite 2 on the commodore amiga has a larger number of systems and planets to visit
No mans sky allows you to fly seamlessly from planet to planet
This game makes you select a landing spot from a menu and then shows you a cutscene of your ship landing
I'm not sure the two games are really comparable tbh, Starfield seems to be a skyrim / mass effect hybrid, no mans sky is a space exploration game, not an rpg
There is nothing to suggest the vast majority of the 100 systems and 1000 planets Bethesda are building are going to be any more than a baron wasteland with nothing to do in starfield, so I'm not sure what you are getting at with your rage essay tbh?I honestly don't know why anybody is wasting their time and the time of people actually looking forward to playing this game by comparing it to those other games. Like not even as a joke, but for real? These games are not the same... Star Citizen from what I've observed for all these years is a glorified damn scam.
Let's keep it a buck. If you see it as something different, cool for you. Starfield as currently constructed based on its premise and overview looks to be a game that is about to do what all those other games TRIED to do, except they're about to do a better job of realizing all that potential because they're about to attach the individual pieces to a far superior overall videogame, a Bethesda singleplayer RPG epic.
Each of the systems shown need not ever go as far as any of those other games do in any one particular shared mechanic, be it space combat, space flight, space exploration, customizing a ship, exploring planets, weapon/gear customization and crafting, collecting resources, character customization, building a base, whatever.
With zero care nor concern for how any of those other games that I've never been interested in playing do what they do, Starfield's systems and mechanics only need be adequate and competent enough to complement the incredible RPG and story experience that Bethesda is building starfield to be.
And this line here...
So more systems and planets to visit right? I can bet my bottom dollar none of it will be more exciting or interesting than the 100 systems and 1,000 planets Bethesda are building for Starfield. Elite Dangerous has over 400 billion star systems. Yes, 400 billion systems in a game I couldn't give a shit about. A game that will NOT be an RPG by the creators of Elder Scrolls Oblivion, that will not be an RPG by the creators of Elder Scrolls: Skyrim or the creators of Fallout 3 and Fallout 4. Starfield has my interest and the interest of others because it will everything those other games are not, a bad ass singleplayer RPG from Bethesda Game Studios. For all the supposed scale in those games, they'll be lucky to have a fraction of the in depth world building and attention to detail and RPG depth and storytelling that Starfield will have. That's why the scale of this game is so fucking impressive. There isn't anything else like it. So, yes, an RPG of Starfield's caliber having this type of scale is a lot more impressive than No Man's Sky, Scam Citizen and Elite Dangerous.
If all these other games somehow did what Starfield is doing better already, then surely you guys have found your game. A thread about a supposed inferior product or replica should be of course be of no interest to people who feel better already exist. Or so we would think....
It's good news for their asset production pipeline and their quest design team, yes. They can't exactly throw it out of the window and be expected to produce the exact same games with the same depth of gameplay or storytelling, using "generalist" engines like unity or UE right away.We've seen some horror shows on teams working on new engines and I'd rather they make it how they know it can work with tools they are used to. I've yet to see any game with the type of worlds and NPCs they make outside from maybe Red Dead 2, so maybe there is something to that engine and their set up
There is nothing to suggest the vast majority of the 100 systems and 1000 planets Bethesda are building are going to be any more than a baron wasteland with nothing to do in starfield, so I'm not sure what you are getting at with your rage essay tbh?
Starfield as currently constructed based on its premise and overview looks to be a game that is about to do what all those other games TRIED to do, except they're about to do a better job of realizing all that potential because they're about to attach the individual pieces to a far superior overall videogame, a Bethesda singleplayer RPG epic.
You don't have to and also I'm sure they've learned lessons from previous games that have this gameplay mechanic.They lost me at building outposts. It's that crap from Fallout 4, all over again.
F**** you Todd Howard.
Ah I see, your one of the "opinions = trolling" crowdMany of course will be barren, and many others won't be. The point remains that of the ones that Bethesda are carefully handcrafting, it isn't even up for debate as to whether the content we find in those important main quest and side quest areas will be on a quality far exceeding anything in the games embarrassingly being compared to Starfield right now. But you're obviously trolling this thread, so I'll ignore you so I can get to discussing so many of the overlooked, but extensive details showcased in the trailer.
Earth could consist of mega cities with you only able to access small portions of each one. That would be awesome. Kinda like Cyberpunk but on a much grander scale.I wonder if there will be a relationship/romance system in this game. If so, I’m definitely gonna romance that Constellation lady; she’s is kinda hot tbh. She’s gonna see a field of stars for sure when I’m done with her.
Btw, did anyone notice that one of the planets we can visit appears to be mars? There’s even a shot in the trailer where our solar system (Sol) is explicitly listed on the space menu, which means there’s a chance that we can actually visit earth. Since it’s doubtful (to say the least) that Bethesda has actually modeled the whole planet with thousands of cities and billions of people, it’s more likely that earth is some kind of wasteland and mostly depopulated.
Probably the best statement regarding this whole thing. I agree with both of you btw. Its not doing anything new, but it is doing it in a way that imho...is superiors to those other games. As those games have a feature here, a feature there, this game damn near has all of em in some form, but from a trusted team that can deliver those aspects in 1 package.
Star Citizen is basically um....trying to do what this game is pretty much doing, so even Star Citizen having more here or more there....its also not even officially released, been worked on longer and chances are...won't fucking even have a release by the time we get Starfield. So what Star Citizen is or is trying to be is irrelevant if it never comes out and Starfield seems like its doing like 99% of what many of us wanted from Star Citizen in the first place, except this is by a real team that is actually making a real game lol
If Star Citizen is not a scam, dear lord...I feel sorry for anyone thinking that a PC AAA exclusive could work. Those days are long gone and Starfield even existing at all, as a multiplatform game proves that such a thing simply can't be done anymore, for fuck sakes Starfield was announced later, released sooner then Star Citizen....maybe those gamers need to concede that console gaming is needed for those AAA budgets. I just don't see how a PC only AAA thing would work, even crowd funded
M mnkl13 oh its going to murder that game's install base on that beta. Even as someone that played it myself, Starfield IS what I wanted Star Citizen to be, but shit... I need to back winner here and the whole fucking game can't just be a concept, theory, idea, beta, alpha for life man. 200 hours in to Starfield, why would I wait to see what Star Citizen turns out to be, but a company known for putting out fucking real games, made the thing I wanted, would make DLC for the thing I wanted, would make sequels to the thing I wanted?
I don't know if I see room for 2 on this one and I feel No Man Sky chipped away at that base, Starfield is going to put a nail in that coffin for sure.
Who’s fault? Game looks awesome. Most people seem to agree. The obvious ones were never going to anyway. If your familiar with them by now.Seriously! Stop hyping up games you haven't seen! It's ok to be interested, but you guys saw absolutely nothing and were screaming game of the year. lol
This is your guys fault. If no one ever said much about this and then saw this today, you might have actually been blown away by this, but there was no way this was ever
going to meet the expectations that you guys created in your own heads.
Framerate will be polished last, frankly it's probably the least of their worries for the devs.
It's 2022, the game has been in development for years now and I'm still not sure what's it's about or if gamebryo 3.0 is up to the task.
Earth could consist of mega cities with you only able to access small portions of each one. That would be awesome. Kinda like Cyberpunk but on a much grander scale.
it looks fine, obviously nothing like the early trailers which is to be expected this is Todd, but as a frame work for the community to build on with mods on PC it should be good.
However nothing stood out and blew me away, it looked just like what I would expect a creation engine game to look like after Fallout 4, improved but still very familiar.
Ship combat is obviously new and untested, interesting to see how much of a focus that is or if its just a little bit of a gimmick in-between the main meat of the game.
Yes, the only thing holding it back is the poor framerate.Combat looks way better/different thhan i expected
you guys saw absolutely nothing and were screaming game of the year. lol
However nothing stood out and blew me away, it looked just like what I would expect a creation engine game to look like after Fallout 4, improved but still very familiar.
Cyberpunk is not a graphically impressive game on any console though. Only on PC with ultra settings does it look amazing. I've been playing it on my XSX and the amount of asset and shadow pop-in while driving reminded me on the PS2 era.Apparently some people expected Cyberpunk graphics. Not doable at this scale lmao
I did noticed the FPS drops and popins but not the npc
Frame rate will be resolved with a decently equipped PC.Yes, the only thing holding it back is the poor framerate.
Combat seems fine to me for how much this game is doing.Combat looks way better/different thhan i expected
Yes, the only thing holding it back is the poor framerate.
The worrying part is that this is probably running on a PC. I expect massive downgrades upon release.That frame rate is woooof..
Already need a Series XX
don’t visit them then. Who’s making you? you’re mad there’s an option you don’t have to take?Thousand planets is a red flag, there’s no way to make exploration interesting or rewarding.. it only works with No Man’s Sky because it’s built until the loop, and the procedural generation is a good hook
I downloaded the deep dive and ran it at 60fps through SVP. Yeah it will be a shame if they cant get this running at 60fps on at least the XSX.The game is a full calendar year away from release.
I am pretty confident these issues will be ironed out before release.
Expecting a solid 60 FPS performance mode on SX .