*S*T*A*R*F*I*E*L*D* / Starfield

Even a single planet is effectively infinite in terms of gameplay on a human scale. I expect anything beyond crafted points of interest to be largely meaningless as anything other than a backdrop.



People have largely been sceptical of Todd's hype rather than shitting on the game. I've played every Bethesda game since Morrowind except FO76 and I'll probably play this too at some point unless they manage to royally fuck it up in some way.

Well colour me disappointed, Howard’s hyperbole prior to this week was all about star field being a next gen experience, years in the making!!!! Yet here we are with no space to planet seedless transition, no voices lead protagonist, 200k lines of text dialog, vast swathes of empty proc gen planetoids and probably some interesting planets with only one type of biome (pure speculation).

How fucking next gen are we talking here?

I actually really enjoyed Fallout 3 and New Vegas, I like the universe but the same limited types of enemy (ghoul, super mutant etc.) in every game gets dull, the quests often not so interesting, the non-VATS combat mediocre but I like the feel of it, the skill tree, humour etc,.
Taking the arm clean off a super mutant via V.A.T.S is always fun.

Is this just No Man's Sky?

Can't say I'm all that interested fro. The initial look, and when they started flicking between shots of locations it just brought back memories of Fallout 4 presentation footage and I'm reminded of all the jank that came with it.

It's on my radar to keep tabs on it but it's not a buy at the moment.

The number of planets thing is a complete red herring. It’s not like each one is going to have anything like the scale of an actual planet. It’s really no different to saying a game has 1000s of locations all on the same planet.

Why, what have they said that is dishonest? What these 1000 planets are and are not is bleedingly obvious, it's just bog standard marketing talk.

My thoughts entirely, the "normal" gunplay is a bit crap and V.A.T.S is more interesting and fun.

They’ve heavily implied that the game will be good, when it will not.

Needs more giant mushrooms, landstriders and cities made from the carapace of gigantic beasts.
And color.

Other than that, looks ok. The seamless planet thing doesn't really bother me. It was cool in NMS for about 30 minutes, but it really wasn't worth the effort it must have taken. Replace it with a cutscene flying out of the atmosphere and it'll be basically the same.

As long as we can walk around Galactica Serenity Moya and chat up the crew on the way somewhere...

Well, obviously they’re not going to be full scale planets, but video game planets, like in NMS. The vast majority will be procedurally generated, a very small number will be the main focus of the
game’s story, a few will have side quests and secrets, most of them will only have resources. I am fine with that.

But even 1000 NMS planets (which are more like the size of large asteroids according to what I've seen) is too much space to be really meaningful. Talking in terms of millions of Skyrims worth of area instead of tens of billions doesn't really make a difference in practice. It's hard to see a way in which the large number will actually make the game better other than maybe as a backdrop to provide a sense of scale.

As I said in another post upthread I'll be surprised if the planet surfaces are even contiguous, seamlessly explorable spaces given the way the current incarnations of the game engine work. And I'm fine with that as well beyond the misleading marketing hype.

It's basically the Mass Effect Mako sections times a hundred. Some people just want to explore planets, even if they're mostly all the same and there's not much to find.

I personally do not see the appeal to that. But as previously mentioned, I don't think Bethesda games are really for me.

Based on 20 years of Bethesda experience.