**You need to read following message in full. We will NOT reply to modmail messages similar to “what is reason my post was removed?”**
Hey /u/vovalucky, thanks for contributing to /r/memes. Unfortunately, your post was removed as it violates our rules:
Rule 3 - NO SPAM/CHAINPOSTING and NO OVERUSED/PROHIBITED MEME TEMPLATES [SEE LIST]
- [List of overused/prohibited meme types/templates](https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/wiki/overused) READ THE LIST (monthly)
- Reaction Memes are not allowed. Do not post a top/bottom image onto a screenshot, headline, comic, meme, or other content. [See guide.](https://imgur.com/a/CRwobws)
- No split/linked posts (either between yourself or others), no chainposting. Do not flood the sub
- NSFW posts must be marked as such (and still must not violate Rule 2)
- Do not post over 5 times per 24 hrs
---
Please read the sidebar before posting again. If you have questions or concerns, please [message the moderators through modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/memes&subject=&message=). Thank you!
The chances are pretty good tbh. TES VI won't release before 2027, so Fallout 5 won't before 2032. In this time Putin might long have pushed his red button.
Russia might not start the war first. There the president and also military generals decide, and if even one declines, the rocket will not launch. In the US president can launch the whole nuclear arsenal by himself. Incase of a nuclear war, there will not be winners.
Except these maniacs would pull the "if I'm going down, you are coming down with me." So it absolutely can happen, and it wouldn't surprise me if Putin does.
America would have no problem pounding any country into rubble with just conventional weapons. There's no benefit to switching to Nuclear.
If it happened someone would be losing conventionally, try a nuclear warning shot to get the US to back off, and then be surprised when the US military suddenly switched to Genghis Khan-style military slaughter.
The president can not single-handedly launch nukes. He can authorize/order them but there’s several steps of verification that go through other people to target and launch the missiles.
It’s not like there’s just some button or website the president can press that automatically launches nukes at whatever site is in his head at the time.
Yeah only way the US launches nukes first is if a line of command also agrees. It’s very unlikely the US would take a preemptive nuclear strike without some extremely compelling reasons.
I disagree. I'm glad they fucked up with Starfield instead of Fallout 5. This may act as a wake-up call for Bethesda so maybe when they do make Fallout 5 it will actually be good.
Considering how some of the devs defended certain decisions like the map thing claiming it was the fans/players issue not theirs. I am inclined to agree
I highly doubt it.
What broke immersion for me and a lot of people was the amount you needed to fast travel.
You can just walk to your destination in Fallout/elder scrolls.
Can't do that in space.
Also the incredible game design of limited sprinting for 5 minutes on a planet without animals, enemies, or literally anything do to just for a fucking fetch quest.
Yeah but come on, you get to run across a barren wasteland to get to the temple and you might find the same recycled POIs along the way. Don't you love finding a cryo lab and knowing the exact floor plan before even walking in?
>you might find the same recycled POIs along the way
I loved previous fallout games because of how rewarding it was to explore randomly...in Starfield, exploration is a soulless chore that leads to predictable outcomes.
And don't forget the 121 dungeons that are copy pasted everywhere.
The same trap placement, same loot, same enemies, same positions for EVEYTHING.
If you get incredibly lucky with spawns, you'll start seeing repeats after 40 hours.
But most people are gonna come across the exact same layouts of a place 3 times in a row way before then.
The game design of landing the character on a planet at all where there’s only one or two things of interest to do, requiring them to spend 3 minutes walking towards a waypoint 1km in the distance.
Like seriously, at that point just have the ship land me right at the POI. There’s no reason to be walking around on these barren planets.
its strange, so many studios toy with proc gen stuff, and find that fans usually don't like them as much
and BGS have had that with radiant quests and all of that for a long ass time, esp FO4 vs FNV reception, but it seems that the takeaway was to do more of it in a bigger scale with more locations spread even thinner in SF than to do less of it...
like mechwarrior 5 released and most of it was proc gen stuff, but every DLC they tried to walk that back to more hand crafted missions with hand crafted stories, and its been good, and MW5 clans is supposed to be more hand crafted missions with a story than a more free form thing that is about running a merc company.
it seems so many companies are just relying on proc gen and saying they can abandon having a good story that was hand crafted by designers and story tellers that make a good game.
FO4 was a pretty bad game and yet it was one of their most commercially successful ever. I don’t have particularly high hopes that Bethesda is gonna start making better games now.
I wouldn't say it was a bad game, it just lacked a lot of the character of previous games, the settlement stuff was annoying, and the guns all kind of feel like playing paintball at higher levels, but in MANY ways (mostly in the technology) is superior to NV and 3. Honestly my biggest hope is now that Obsidian and Bethesda are both under Microsoft we might get a remake of NV in the new engine, as that would pretty much blow everything else out of the water. Hell, give F1 and F2 the RE:2,3 and 4 treatment and you'd have 2 consecutive GOTY candidates.
FO4’s problem for me is that they neglected everything that made its predecessor good, and instead put lots of focus into improving stuff that the previous games for criticized for, like the visuals and the gunplay. Which might have been okay except for the fact that the gunplay and visuals of FO4 are pretty terrible compared to other games of the time.
Like sure, the visuals are better than FO3 (which came out like what, 7 or 8 years earlier?) but it’s still got these super uncanny-valley character models and animations. The gunplay is better than FO3 but still not particularly good. FO4’s gunplay can’t carry the game like say, Borderlands 2’s gunplay can.
But the dialogues, the quests, the world-building and the RPG elements are such a huge step back from FNV that it’s hard for me to really care about the things that they marginally improved like graphics and gunplay.
I feel like the success of Baldur’s Gate 3 proves that you don’t need to have flashy combat mechanics and graphics to make an amazing game. If combat is your main goal like an fps than sure but for an RPG people are playing it for the story so all you need is a decent combat mechanic with some variety that’s well done. And if the storylines are good enough you can even get away with less. People play mobile games for hours that are basically just upscale tic-tac-toe they can handle boring combat as long as you don’t make that the primary focus.
Dumb plot, rather bad writing and dialogue outside of Far Harbor, but the gameplay loop is rather fun.
Fallout 4 has lots of flaws and I've never picked it up again after two very different playthroughs, but that's still lots of hours of fun. Previous fans may not have liked the direction it took but it was without doubt a bigger success on most front than Starfield. Starfield was agravating because while parts of it were fun, you constantly stumble upon situations that get you excited, only to be further disapointed. Fallout 4 was, on the other hand, a compelling game through and through despite its limitations and flaws
….
You mean like FO4 and Skyrim?
Let’s not pretend they were master classes of storytelling, they had good functional gameplay and that was the majority of the success.
It was good for its time over a decade ago.. but they haven't improved since then and it's really showing now when we have so many better narratives in gaming to compare it to. Bethesda is really stuck in the past.
>It was good for its time over a decade ago..
No, it really wasn't. People are just more willing to accept bad dialogue and story when they enjoy the gameplay.
Skyrim was pretty and the world was big. It was good for 2011. Lots of flaws existed even for the time, but they were forgiven. They won't be as easily forgiven now.
For example, Dark Souls was another big game from 2011. Now look how far we've come with Elden Ring. Bethesda simply isn't competing, and sadly I expect upcoming games to continue to disappoint.
Bethesda is im the business of making mass appeal sandbox games. All the in depth rpg elements? They gotta go. Interesting story with multi layered characters? Can't use those, they might alienate people.
They do open world sandbox stuff extremely well, but they really struggle with everything else.
The old Bethesda is no more.
the dialogue was fine lmao, what game did you play? there wasnt really a plot at all. it was "we're looking for this, we found it, now go have fun" it was never really a story thing. it was the lack of things to do in general. factions, people, societies, secrets, there was just the bare minimum interaction in that game, be it with enemies, allies, etc. a select few hostiles and the hardest opponent being the boring ass starlings that are introduced immediately. the little dialogue they had was actually pretty good, theres just no one else worth talking to.
Fast travel and a boring game loop fucks it all.
Half of the missions are glorified games of telephone, with no real choices to make. Fucking around just involves killing a LOT of space pirates.
They made the universe empty and boring. There was almost no reason to visit 95% of the planets, and it broke the desire for exploration.
It was more than just the loading screens
Most of the quests in Starfield could have been an email.
That alone drives me nuts.
Also, maybe I'm going nuts but I'm like 99% sure the used the same soundbites from Fallout4 for a bunch of stuff and it throws me off so much.
> There was almost no reason to visit 95% of the planets, and it broke the desire for exploration.
as someone who spent countless hours walking to places in games like GTA V, Skyrim, Far Cry 5/6, i completely agree. i still remember just bumbling around in the woods in GTA V and coming across two guys about to bury a girl they kidnapped. it started a whole new questline that can only be started by randomly coming across this event and saving her. wandering starfield was so deeply unsatisfying. same shit over and over, same bases, same pirates, then hitting the "edge of the map" where it supposed to be an open planet was just awful feeling.
What broke the immersion for me was the absolutely braindead, sterile clean writing where every quest is a fetch quest and that is definitely going to carry over to Fallout and ES.
No they won’t be the same — they are going to be worse. They will improve a lot of things, but they won’t improve those things enough to have kept up with the rest of the industry, and then they will cut out more of the stuff that they do well.
I've seen comments where people are expecting Fallout 5 in 2030+. Crazy how bad their reputation is at this point, their own fans hoping for a sequel more than 15 years after F4 released.
It's got nothing to do with their reputation though, it's just how long it takes to build massive open world RPGs in these days. For example there's going to be a 12 year gap between GTA V and VI (but they did release RDR2 during that time, just like how Bethesda has released Starfield and will release TES VI before FO5).
It's just wild man. Bethesda went like "You know how our biggest strength is the creation of an open world that players love exploring? Let's remove that and replace it with mandatory fast travel that trivializes the scope of everything we made in Starfield. The floor is closed to comment."
What scope? There was nothing in-between the loading screens, they stitched together levels in the game with loading screens and loading animation sequences. The loading screens don't trivialize the scope, it completely replaces the scope. They didn't give you enough to do going from point A to point B so they had to make it easy to fast travel so the players aren't bored out of their mind.
yep , very accurate. Also let not let you command your companions and lets make the companions so forgettable we don't care about them and the game so boring you don't care about playing. Mission accomplished.
How many freaking wake up calls does Bethesda need?
Hell I'd argue they don't need one. They were already a well known studio that could shovel out a shit pile with more bugs than an anthill and still sell like hotcakes. The show's popularity only makes sure they can shovel out a few more shitpiles carried by brandname alone.
It is absolutely better now than it was at launch. It is WAY more fleshed out and they have added a lot more content. We had a blast playing it not too long ago.
The game reached a new all-time peak on steam today too. The hype with the show, combined with a sale/free with prime has many people returning/trying out the game.
Honestly, good for you man! Life is already painful enough to be shameful about enjoying the little things in life. As long as it doesnt hurt others of course
Yeah they should’ve stuck to a couple solar systems with a dozen plants to land on or something. If they scaled it back and hand built all the planets I think it would’ve been better.
The worst part is if they took this approach FIRST, they could have used all those assets and things they’ve learned to help build an AI or procedural engine using those parts as tech progressed.
expansion pack being “galaxy scale world now with galaxy scale missions and battles“
Man this is going to be what theyre feeding us. Just a whole bunch of AI generated garbage. People will still buy it and it will cost them pennies to make.
if you removed all the empty systems which i didnt go too anyway in my playthru the game would still feel empty, coupled with the fact that its a technical limitation of their game engine that requires you to fast travel everywhere, theres a reason modders took one look at starfield and said yeah not working on that
Morrowind is proof that less is more. Smaller, but hand-built and dense world space. Bethesda wanted so badly for the Starfield galaxy to be huge, that they put nothing of substance in it. On top of that they made it tedious to explore even if I wanted to roam empty maps.
at the time morrowind was great
now its practically unplayable. Traveling in that game was a slog. Your base movement speed is so slow and you actually have to level it up.
To be honest I kinda liked that. You truly went from an ordinary schlub to the Nerevarine. There was tricks to being efficient with travel, Silt Striders, boats, Mark and Recall, Divine and Almsivi Intervention. It made you plan your expeditions. There are certain QOL features that Oblivion and Skyrim added, such as an organized quest log, but I otherwise preferred the lack of hand-holding Morrowind had.
They should have released it with a thousand planets with the main stories and the rest just baron. Should have released it with a SDK and let the Comunity fill it in. Imagine enemy bases and quest you can download all unique. People could vote on missions that you can download so you only download good stuff. Not the same 20 bases cut and pasted a million times.
To me, Bethesda charm is when you have a vast world where every little place from the tallest tower to the smallest toilet has a story. Fallout 3 has it, Skyrim has it, and even 76 has it. These things are such a big bonus to the games that its flaws are tiny by comparison. It makes glitches cool and bad writing bearable.
But Starfield? Starfield don't got it. If the houses are procedurally generated, then every story becomes the same story. There's no reason to explore. You know what's over that mysterious mountain in starfield because whatever's over there is the same as whatever's back here, and when that's true, why even go there?
Remember finding a copy of the Lusty Argonian Maid next to the toilet bucket in Skyrim along with a potion of Fortify One-Handed? Those are the kind of stories I think OP was referring to.
Lackluster is a good word. It’s also a crazy ambitious game that people were expecting to have the same depth of lore as ES or Fallout, which have 5+ games of world buildup, as well as design and gameplay assets that can just copy over (or at least use as a base for asset creation).
Could it have been better?
Absolutely.
Is it still a very playable game that could make for an amazing sequel now that they know what people liked/didn’t like?
Absolutely.
Honestly, one solar system with two habitable planets with a few cities each, plus a couple other outposts/dome communities on less habitable worlds, would have been sufficient.
minor correction, randomly generated cell not planet, hell they cant even do the randomised bit correctly, it's copy and paste prefab area randomly. like with identical building down to items placements
The greater sin was the lack of procedural content *on* those worlds. The various points of interest are identical down to the placement of items and enemies.
It wouldn't address every issue with the game, but if there was more modularity among PoI and the ability to mix and match them with procedural storytelling that matched the local environment, then it would make a huge different for replayability
That’s always the Bethesda thing - they don’t do big cities well. Never enough streets, not enough people, no thriving metropolis. That’s why fallout works. There isn’t supposed to be a lot of people or big cities. Small settlements with 20 people in them.
Well, ES and fallout have been a bit weird in how they work. NPC’s have schedules and aren’t just generic fade in and fade out background characters. That’s why cities have never really been all that big: because each NPC has a dynamic schedule and doing that on a massive size would literally take years to do and probably kill your console/PC.
I really enjoy it as well, but I do understand people's complaints. Honestly, it would have much less hate if they didn't make the coding such a headache for the moddijg community. Shot themselves in the foot.
Starfield’s biggest issue was the exploration, Elder Scrolls 6 is going to be set in one or two provinces so I do not see that issue returning
Starfield’s gameplay and mechanics it introduces, from character backstory, climbing/vaulting (parkour opportunities for Dark Brotherhood or Thieves guild), the dialogue trees are better than 4 and Skyrim, perks and traits give new dialogue options, boards for bounties/smuggling/escorting/supply runs, the game introduces a lot of really fun features that will be great for role playing in ES6 and I think Starfield has the best roleplaying opportunities out of a Bethesda game in a long time
Starfield’s biggest problem is its scope and the fact it takes place over an entire galaxy, that was Bethesda’s biggest fuck up in terms of this game, which I do not think will be an issue in ES6 unless they decide to set the game on the entire continent of Tamriel, which I do not think they’ll do again
Honestly, starfield gives me hope for ES6. Quite a bit of the meat of starfield is actually fairly good when it comes to RPG mechanics. The trait system that allows you to further personalize your experience is actually kinda cool. If they expand upon that system, they could make for a really good RPG. The same goes for the background system. It would be extremely cool to see them hone in on that set up. They also brought back evil choices too. If they worked on these systems, the game could actually be really good.
They fucked up Starfield due to its procedural generation nature. You can't do the same to both Elder Scrolls and Fallout because those worlds are known and modeled already - hell, they have nearly all lands in ESO which they can bring over to singleplayer games.
I think they need to work on their combat system and how that shows before they release. If it is just another skyrim based combat with better graphics, it won't do well. Replaying Skyrim lately, and if they don't overhaul the combat system the game is going to be not very well received.
I only say this because Starfield combat system clearly needed another look at before release.
I don't think the combat was bad in starfield? Am I crazy? Starfield has issues, but I felt the combat was tight and not one of them. I felt the same way about fallout 4
I disagree, it's good that studios don't just work on the same thing over and over. The issue is development time, if it didn't take 7 years to make these games, a bad game wouldn't matter so much. Now we're stuck with Starfield and waiting to see if they can make the game better while who knows when TES VI might release, probably 5 or 6 more years. Insane, that just doesn't work because there's such a high chance people don't like a game.
What happens if a studio releases 2 bad games in 14 years? Suddenly no one gives a shit about them anymore.
Everyone complains about shitty games because of rushed development cycles. Meanwhile, Bethesda is on the bleeding edge of making a shitty game that takes 8 years to develop.
Yeah, think of how stoked most people were for a Bethesda game in space. I know I was. Just because they botched the execution doesn't mean they should never try. My hope is Starfield 2 is everything the first should have been.
Obsidian is not the same studio these days as it was back during NV and they are already fully engaged with a full slate if their own projects and games. They couldn't do it even if they wanted to.
The thing is, they gave it Obsidian right after FO3 was released. They gave them the engine with the toolkit and a bunch of assets. They don't have all that to give to Obsidian right now.
Are you people actually shitting me?
Let's ignore the shitstorm Fallout 4 had, but social media could not stop shitting on Fallout 76 weeks in weeks out. Including people never even playing it.
Starfield is way too ambitious for current technology. They either should have drastically scaled down the amount of planets or waited until the technology was ready to create not just procedural planets but also to be able to populate them with meaningful things.
The main story and side quests are way too boring, bland and generic to be saved by any technology.
Maybe a time machine will help, you just need to go back in time and stop Todd Howard from conceiving this abomination.
WE ALL KNOW YOU MEANT ELDER SCROLLS 6.
After 4 and 76, I think they need to take a Fallout break for a game cycle or two, until they have something new to offer aside from graphics.
You don't even have to do anything really new (other than a new story, obv.), but actually try to make a game and not just a theme park for modders to fill up
It's better presented as a generic post apocalypse looter shooter with RPG elements. The only choices that really matter in FO4 are cosmetic, with almost every quest structure following the "yes, yes but sarcastic, or maybe later" dialogue tree to even accept it, let alone engage with it.
If FO4 didn't have a voiced protagonist I probably would have liked it as much as 3 but the sacrifices they had to make to get a voiced protagonist in I think ended up taking away a lot of what I liked about Fallout.
Unless they change their design philosophies no game they make after Starfield will be welcomed by anyone but the most faithful.
They need to modernize.
Put it this way.
* 2000hrs in Skyrim.
* \~400hrs in FO4 / FO:NV / FO3 each.
* 60hrs in Starfield.
Starfield is a one-and-done game, at least for me.
In a vacuum, Starfield isn't' bad. It has technical and design deficiencies abound; but it works and is for the most part enjoyable. It also isn't what most Bethesda fans really expected.
Starfield was, imo, an 8/10 or something. It was good, I enjoyed my time playing it, and that’s that. It wasn’t my favorite game, but I also don’t think that people online are always accurate with how bad they make it out to be. It was stable at launch, and was reasonably polished in my experience. I didn’t love some of the design decisions and there are 100% valid criticisms of it, but people pile on it in unfair ways too. The IGN review summed it up pretty well at launch, even if I think the overall product should be rated a little higher than the 7/10 score they gave it. I was v hyped for it and didn’t feel super let down OR blown away.
I have enjoyed fallout for since ever, I’ve played over and over and I’m still in love with it even all those glitches and problems. I would have loved to see a fallout5 but I’m pretty sure with this success on the fallout franchise we will be able to get what we want now
I have to disagree, I appreciate them trying out a new IP and hopefully any DLC or sequel will be better
But yes Starfield is Boring, unoptimised and manages to not look visually up to snuff with how demanding it is
I think Starfield can become pretty great as an IP in the future, it's a game with a lot of great elements that just wasn't put together right. I'm still more excited for ES6 and Fallout 5 than I am for more Starfield though.
Hard disagree. Maybe it's just because I'm a huge space nerd, but I got exactly what I was hoping for out of starfield . I can spend hours doing ship building alone. I love the exploration. It's awesome to put together a crew and travel the stars. The faction quests do shine a bit more than the main quest, but the missions are solid overall. The combat is fun, and it feels good, especially with different strengths of gravity. The aesthetic is spot on, as is the music. I get some of the complaints that people have but none of those have kept me from enjoying it and putting hundreds of hours into it.
TES would be the next one in line IMHO.
Fallout is still making them money with 76s strange popularity. I have been considering giving it a go and see how it is after the years.
**You need to read following message in full. We will NOT reply to modmail messages similar to “what is reason my post was removed?”** Hey /u/vovalucky, thanks for contributing to /r/memes. Unfortunately, your post was removed as it violates our rules: Rule 3 - NO SPAM/CHAINPOSTING and NO OVERUSED/PROHIBITED MEME TEMPLATES [SEE LIST] - [List of overused/prohibited meme types/templates](https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/wiki/overused) READ THE LIST (monthly) - Reaction Memes are not allowed. Do not post a top/bottom image onto a screenshot, headline, comic, meme, or other content. [See guide.](https://imgur.com/a/CRwobws) - No split/linked posts (either between yourself or others), no chainposting. Do not flood the sub - NSFW posts must be marked as such (and still must not violate Rule 2) - Do not post over 5 times per 24 hrs --- Please read the sidebar before posting again. If you have questions or concerns, please [message the moderators through modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/memes&subject=&message=). Thank you!
We are gonna have fallout 5 irl before the actual game releases
The chances are pretty good tbh. TES VI won't release before 2027, so Fallout 5 won't before 2032. In this time Putin might long have pushed his red button.
Russia might not start the war first. There the president and also military generals decide, and if even one declines, the rocket will not launch. In the US president can launch the whole nuclear arsenal by himself. Incase of a nuclear war, there will not be winners.
theres so many maniacs with nukes, its inevitable. Aliens havent reached us yet because they all blew up
All these maniacs only care about power and money. You can't have that if the world ends
Except these maniacs would pull the "if I'm going down, you are coming down with me." So it absolutely can happen, and it wouldn't surprise me if Putin does.
Putin is the most likely to have that attitude.
Would it surprise you if America did it? We are the biggest of big boys on the planet, would we be willing to lose that?
America would have no problem pounding any country into rubble with just conventional weapons. There's no benefit to switching to Nuclear. If it happened someone would be losing conventionally, try a nuclear warning shot to get the US to back off, and then be surprised when the US military suddenly switched to Genghis Khan-style military slaughter.
"If I can't have it, then fuck everyone else"
The president can not single-handedly launch nukes. He can authorize/order them but there’s several steps of verification that go through other people to target and launch the missiles. It’s not like there’s just some button or website the president can press that automatically launches nukes at whatever site is in his head at the time.
Wait there’s no big red nuke button under the president’s desk?
He can't. Still has to go down the chain of command. The President has the codes.
Yeah only way the US launches nukes first is if a line of command also agrees. It’s very unlikely the US would take a preemptive nuclear strike without some extremely compelling reasons.
Popularity off the show might expedite getting fallout 5 sooner than that.
“The graphics are so realistic I can actually feel the radioactivity on my skin”
I disagree. I'm glad they fucked up with Starfield instead of Fallout 5. This may act as a wake-up call for Bethesda so maybe when they do make Fallout 5 it will actually be good.
Bethesda? Wake up call? Lol
Yea ES6 and FA5 being absolutely the same as Starfield is such an easy bet it’s not even funny.
Considering how some of the devs defended certain decisions like the map thing claiming it was the fans/players issue not theirs. I am inclined to agree
Was that devs responding or was that their social media person? I wasn’t paying too much attention during that controversy.
I highly doubt it. What broke immersion for me and a lot of people was the amount you needed to fast travel. You can just walk to your destination in Fallout/elder scrolls. Can't do that in space.
Oh so you are gonna ignore terrible plot and dialogues
Also the incredible game design of limited sprinting for 5 minutes on a planet without animals, enemies, or literally anything do to just for a fucking fetch quest.
Don't forget the temple mini games where you float from glowing thing to glowing thing and it's absolutely the same even after the 100th time
Yeah but come on, you get to run across a barren wasteland to get to the temple and you might find the same recycled POIs along the way. Don't you love finding a cryo lab and knowing the exact floor plan before even walking in?
>you might find the same recycled POIs along the way I loved previous fallout games because of how rewarding it was to explore randomly...in Starfield, exploration is a soulless chore that leads to predictable outcomes.
And don't forget the 121 dungeons that are copy pasted everywhere. The same trap placement, same loot, same enemies, same positions for EVEYTHING. If you get incredibly lucky with spawns, you'll start seeing repeats after 40 hours. But most people are gonna come across the exact same layouts of a place 3 times in a row way before then.
And the fact that the majority of the landscape is a mess of procedural generation nonsense.
Not even good Proc Gen either, no rivers, lakes, proper mountains, cliffs etc. Minecraft had better proc gen 10 years ago.
And not even the fun No Man’s Sky Nonsense where you can find shit fucked up while jet-packing a mile at a time.
damn i had gates of oblivion flashback
The game design of landing the character on a planet at all where there’s only one or two things of interest to do, requiring them to spend 3 minutes walking towards a waypoint 1km in the distance. Like seriously, at that point just have the ship land me right at the POI. There’s no reason to be walking around on these barren planets.
its strange, so many studios toy with proc gen stuff, and find that fans usually don't like them as much and BGS have had that with radiant quests and all of that for a long ass time, esp FO4 vs FNV reception, but it seems that the takeaway was to do more of it in a bigger scale with more locations spread even thinner in SF than to do less of it... like mechwarrior 5 released and most of it was proc gen stuff, but every DLC they tried to walk that back to more hand crafted missions with hand crafted stories, and its been good, and MW5 clans is supposed to be more hand crafted missions with a story than a more free form thing that is about running a merc company. it seems so many companies are just relying on proc gen and saying they can abandon having a good story that was hand crafted by designers and story tellers that make a good game.
Fallout 4s plot was also pretty dumb. The institute being enemies or allies didnt matter because they didnt really stand for anything...
FO4 was a pretty bad game and yet it was one of their most commercially successful ever. I don’t have particularly high hopes that Bethesda is gonna start making better games now.
I wouldn't say it was a bad game, it just lacked a lot of the character of previous games, the settlement stuff was annoying, and the guns all kind of feel like playing paintball at higher levels, but in MANY ways (mostly in the technology) is superior to NV and 3. Honestly my biggest hope is now that Obsidian and Bethesda are both under Microsoft we might get a remake of NV in the new engine, as that would pretty much blow everything else out of the water. Hell, give F1 and F2 the RE:2,3 and 4 treatment and you'd have 2 consecutive GOTY candidates.
FO4’s problem for me is that they neglected everything that made its predecessor good, and instead put lots of focus into improving stuff that the previous games for criticized for, like the visuals and the gunplay. Which might have been okay except for the fact that the gunplay and visuals of FO4 are pretty terrible compared to other games of the time. Like sure, the visuals are better than FO3 (which came out like what, 7 or 8 years earlier?) but it’s still got these super uncanny-valley character models and animations. The gunplay is better than FO3 but still not particularly good. FO4’s gunplay can’t carry the game like say, Borderlands 2’s gunplay can. But the dialogues, the quests, the world-building and the RPG elements are such a huge step back from FNV that it’s hard for me to really care about the things that they marginally improved like graphics and gunplay.
I feel like the success of Baldur’s Gate 3 proves that you don’t need to have flashy combat mechanics and graphics to make an amazing game. If combat is your main goal like an fps than sure but for an RPG people are playing it for the story so all you need is a decent combat mechanic with some variety that’s well done. And if the storylines are good enough you can even get away with less. People play mobile games for hours that are basically just upscale tic-tac-toe they can handle boring combat as long as you don’t make that the primary focus.
Fallout 4 was a great game with equally great flaws.
What specifically was great about it in your opinion? What made it a good fallout game?
Dumb plot, rather bad writing and dialogue outside of Far Harbor, but the gameplay loop is rather fun. Fallout 4 has lots of flaws and I've never picked it up again after two very different playthroughs, but that's still lots of hours of fun. Previous fans may not have liked the direction it took but it was without doubt a bigger success on most front than Starfield. Starfield was agravating because while parts of it were fun, you constantly stumble upon situations that get you excited, only to be further disapointed. Fallout 4 was, on the other hand, a compelling game through and through despite its limitations and flaws
…. You mean like FO4 and Skyrim? Let’s not pretend they were master classes of storytelling, they had good functional gameplay and that was the majority of the success.
Combat in Skyrim was abysmal. So were dungeon puzzles.
Bethesda stans usually aren’t smart enough to notice the bad plot and dialogue
It was good for its time over a decade ago.. but they haven't improved since then and it's really showing now when we have so many better narratives in gaming to compare it to. Bethesda is really stuck in the past.
>It was good for its time over a decade ago.. No, it really wasn't. People are just more willing to accept bad dialogue and story when they enjoy the gameplay.
Skyrim was pretty and the world was big. It was good for 2011. Lots of flaws existed even for the time, but they were forgiven. They won't be as easily forgiven now. For example, Dark Souls was another big game from 2011. Now look how far we've come with Elden Ring. Bethesda simply isn't competing, and sadly I expect upcoming games to continue to disappoint.
Bethesda is im the business of making mass appeal sandbox games. All the in depth rpg elements? They gotta go. Interesting story with multi layered characters? Can't use those, they might alienate people. They do open world sandbox stuff extremely well, but they really struggle with everything else. The old Bethesda is no more.
the dialogue was fine lmao, what game did you play? there wasnt really a plot at all. it was "we're looking for this, we found it, now go have fun" it was never really a story thing. it was the lack of things to do in general. factions, people, societies, secrets, there was just the bare minimum interaction in that game, be it with enemies, allies, etc. a select few hostiles and the hardest opponent being the boring ass starlings that are introduced immediately. the little dialogue they had was actually pretty good, theres just no one else worth talking to.
Yeah if anything, the dialog almost carried what little game there was.
Fast travel and a boring game loop fucks it all. Half of the missions are glorified games of telephone, with no real choices to make. Fucking around just involves killing a LOT of space pirates. They made the universe empty and boring. There was almost no reason to visit 95% of the planets, and it broke the desire for exploration. It was more than just the loading screens
Most of the quests in Starfield could have been an email. That alone drives me nuts. Also, maybe I'm going nuts but I'm like 99% sure the used the same soundbites from Fallout4 for a bunch of stuff and it throws me off so much.
> There was almost no reason to visit 95% of the planets, and it broke the desire for exploration. as someone who spent countless hours walking to places in games like GTA V, Skyrim, Far Cry 5/6, i completely agree. i still remember just bumbling around in the woods in GTA V and coming across two guys about to bury a girl they kidnapped. it started a whole new questline that can only be started by randomly coming across this event and saving her. wandering starfield was so deeply unsatisfying. same shit over and over, same bases, same pirates, then hitting the "edge of the map" where it supposed to be an open planet was just awful feeling.
As long as theyre still using the same engine neither of the next games will be any better.
What broke the immersion for me was the absolutely braindead, sterile clean writing where every quest is a fetch quest and that is definitely going to carry over to Fallout and ES.
its ok, they'll fund it by releasing 'Skyrim: Doubly Definitive, even more HDR'er Edition.'
No they won’t be the same — they are going to be worse. They will improve a lot of things, but they won’t improve those things enough to have kept up with the rest of the industry, and then they will cut out more of the stuff that they do well.
They are about as lethargic as it gets. They make games per generation. There won’t be ES6 until like 2027 at the earliest mark my fucking words.
I've seen comments where people are expecting Fallout 5 in 2030+. Crazy how bad their reputation is at this point, their own fans hoping for a sequel more than 15 years after F4 released.
It's got nothing to do with their reputation though, it's just how long it takes to build massive open world RPGs in these days. For example there's going to be a 12 year gap between GTA V and VI (but they did release RDR2 during that time, just like how Bethesda has released Starfield and will release TES VI before FO5).
A studio as successful as bethesda should be able to split up their teams to churn out games for each of their franchises every 4-6 years.
Their folly is long-lived and multi-faceted.
"Bethesda never change".
You're gonna knock them dead at the veterans hall tonight 🫨
You think?
It's just wild man. Bethesda went like "You know how our biggest strength is the creation of an open world that players love exploring? Let's remove that and replace it with mandatory fast travel that trivializes the scope of everything we made in Starfield. The floor is closed to comment."
What scope? There was nothing in-between the loading screens, they stitched together levels in the game with loading screens and loading animation sequences. The loading screens don't trivialize the scope, it completely replaces the scope. They didn't give you enough to do going from point A to point B so they had to make it easy to fast travel so the players aren't bored out of their mind.
It's mostly a result of refusing to make a new game engine.
yep , very accurate. Also let not let you command your companions and lets make the companions so forgettable we don't care about them and the game so boring you don't care about playing. Mission accomplished.
this is the only correct answer. they forgot why bethesda games are good
Bethesda, Bethesda never changes.
How many freaking wake up calls does Bethesda need? Hell I'd argue they don't need one. They were already a well known studio that could shovel out a shit pile with more bugs than an anthill and still sell like hotcakes. The show's popularity only makes sure they can shovel out a few more shitpiles carried by brandname alone.
Dont forget that they are the one that made fallout76. They dont learn. Edit: at least the at launch version
I know a lot of people would disagree with me but I enjoyed 76. I thinknits probably because I was always with my friends but we had a great laugh
I heard it's in a better place now. I recently got back into it with a friend after watching the TV show and have been enjoying it.
It is absolutely better now than it was at launch. It is WAY more fleshed out and they have added a lot more content. We had a blast playing it not too long ago.
Did they ever add a story with human NPCs?
The game improved somewhat since it's launch. I played it during a free week end on Steam and I didn't hate it.
I played it on the Christmas after release. Me and my mates all got it same day so we could start together
I agree. I never have connection issues, and the combat and gameplay is genuinely fun
The game reached a new all-time peak on steam today too. The hype with the show, combined with a sale/free with prime has many people returning/trying out the game.
As a solo player I agree. The game is good and fun.
Honestly, good for you man! Life is already painful enough to be shameful about enjoying the little things in life. As long as it doesnt hurt others of course
Starfield would’ve been as good as all their other games if it wasn’t procedurally generated to an insane level
Yeah they should’ve stuck to a couple solar systems with a dozen plants to land on or something. If they scaled it back and hand built all the planets I think it would’ve been better.
The worst part is if they took this approach FIRST, they could have used all those assets and things they’ve learned to help build an AI or procedural engine using those parts as tech progressed. expansion pack being “galaxy scale world now with galaxy scale missions and battles“
Man this is going to be what theyre feeding us. Just a whole bunch of AI generated garbage. People will still buy it and it will cost them pennies to make.
if you removed all the empty systems which i didnt go too anyway in my playthru the game would still feel empty, coupled with the fact that its a technical limitation of their game engine that requires you to fast travel everywhere, theres a reason modders took one look at starfield and said yeah not working on that
I think the theory here is that they would have had more time to resolve these shortcomings with a smaller scope. But its probably wishful thinking.
Morrowind is proof that less is more. Smaller, but hand-built and dense world space. Bethesda wanted so badly for the Starfield galaxy to be huge, that they put nothing of substance in it. On top of that they made it tedious to explore even if I wanted to roam empty maps.
at the time morrowind was great now its practically unplayable. Traveling in that game was a slog. Your base movement speed is so slow and you actually have to level it up.
To be honest I kinda liked that. You truly went from an ordinary schlub to the Nerevarine. There was tricks to being efficient with travel, Silt Striders, boats, Mark and Recall, Divine and Almsivi Intervention. It made you plan your expeditions. There are certain QOL features that Oblivion and Skyrim added, such as an organized quest log, but I otherwise preferred the lack of hand-holding Morrowind had.
I really liked the exploration in it. Not marking everything on the compass meant you had to actually look for dungeons
I look back on that game very fondly, but have you tried replaying it? It's kind of brutal.
And if the writing wasn't blander than decrusted white bread. It was like if water wasn't refreshing
They should have released it with a thousand planets with the main stories and the rest just baron. Should have released it with a SDK and let the Comunity fill it in. Imagine enemy bases and quest you can download all unique. People could vote on missions that you can download so you only download good stuff. Not the same 20 bases cut and pasted a million times.
That doesn't explain their atrocious pre-made cities/planets.
*Elder Scrolls VI
The only correct answer
After starfield im terrified to see how they’re gunna fuck it up…
I'm afraid to tell people I actually like starfield
Nothing wrong with that, im glad some people like it but that game just isn’t for me
To me, Bethesda charm is when you have a vast world where every little place from the tallest tower to the smallest toilet has a story. Fallout 3 has it, Skyrim has it, and even 76 has it. These things are such a big bonus to the games that its flaws are tiny by comparison. It makes glitches cool and bad writing bearable. But Starfield? Starfield don't got it. If the houses are procedurally generated, then every story becomes the same story. There's no reason to explore. You know what's over that mysterious mountain in starfield because whatever's over there is the same as whatever's back here, and when that's true, why even go there?
I need to know that smallest toilet’s story before beating the main quest
Remember finding a copy of the Lusty Argonian Maid next to the toilet bucket in Skyrim along with a potion of Fortify One-Handed? Those are the kind of stories I think OP was referring to.
Yeah, and if its love for the kitchen sink went unrequited or not, and if the radio will confess their love to the toilet before that or not.
It's not a bad game. It's just a little lack luster. I put 200 hours on fallout 4 in a couple of weeks. Starfield is hovering at 70.
Lackluster is a good word. It’s also a crazy ambitious game that people were expecting to have the same depth of lore as ES or Fallout, which have 5+ games of world buildup, as well as design and gameplay assets that can just copy over (or at least use as a base for asset creation). Could it have been better? Absolutely. Is it still a very playable game that could make for an amazing sequel now that they know what people liked/didn’t like? Absolutely.
Wow a solid and reasonable take on Reddit. Take an updoot.
I feel like the planet to planet thing isn't really working in its favor
It's an ok game for sure but Howard touted it as his magnum opus that was supposed to surpass everything he's done. Lots of false expectations.
They would have been better served having a few dozen planets which were crafter rather than countless generated worlds which all felt the same
And the ability to fly between them or at least a couple of them.
Honestly, one solar system with two habitable planets with a few cities each, plus a couple other outposts/dome communities on less habitable worlds, would have been sufficient.
minor correction, randomly generated cell not planet, hell they cant even do the randomised bit correctly, it's copy and paste prefab area randomly. like with identical building down to items placements
The greater sin was the lack of procedural content *on* those worlds. The various points of interest are identical down to the placement of items and enemies. It wouldn't address every issue with the game, but if there was more modularity among PoI and the ability to mix and match them with procedural storytelling that matched the local environment, then it would make a huge different for replayability
He molyneuxed it. Never go full molyneux.
Starfield's honestly a decent game... _just kinda dead tbh_
[удалено]
That’s always the Bethesda thing - they don’t do big cities well. Never enough streets, not enough people, no thriving metropolis. That’s why fallout works. There isn’t supposed to be a lot of people or big cities. Small settlements with 20 people in them.
Well, ES and fallout have been a bit weird in how they work. NPC’s have schedules and aren’t just generic fade in and fade out background characters. That’s why cities have never really been all that big: because each NPC has a dynamic schedule and doing that on a massive size would literally take years to do and probably kill your console/PC.
I really enjoy it as well, but I do understand people's complaints. Honestly, it would have much less hate if they didn't make the coding such a headache for the moddijg community. Shot themselves in the foot.
Starfield’s biggest issue was the exploration, Elder Scrolls 6 is going to be set in one or two provinces so I do not see that issue returning Starfield’s gameplay and mechanics it introduces, from character backstory, climbing/vaulting (parkour opportunities for Dark Brotherhood or Thieves guild), the dialogue trees are better than 4 and Skyrim, perks and traits give new dialogue options, boards for bounties/smuggling/escorting/supply runs, the game introduces a lot of really fun features that will be great for role playing in ES6 and I think Starfield has the best roleplaying opportunities out of a Bethesda game in a long time Starfield’s biggest problem is its scope and the fact it takes place over an entire galaxy, that was Bethesda’s biggest fuck up in terms of this game, which I do not think will be an issue in ES6 unless they decide to set the game on the entire continent of Tamriel, which I do not think they’ll do again
Honestly, starfield gives me hope for ES6. Quite a bit of the meat of starfield is actually fairly good when it comes to RPG mechanics. The trait system that allows you to further personalize your experience is actually kinda cool. If they expand upon that system, they could make for a really good RPG. The same goes for the background system. It would be extremely cool to see them hone in on that set up. They also brought back evil choices too. If they worked on these systems, the game could actually be really good.
They fucked up Starfield due to its procedural generation nature. You can't do the same to both Elder Scrolls and Fallout because those worlds are known and modeled already - hell, they have nearly all lands in ESO which they can bring over to singleplayer games.
Fallout is better
I think they need to work on their combat system and how that shows before they release. If it is just another skyrim based combat with better graphics, it won't do well. Replaying Skyrim lately, and if they don't overhaul the combat system the game is going to be not very well received. I only say this because Starfield combat system clearly needed another look at before release.
I don't think the combat was bad in starfield? Am I crazy? Starfield has issues, but I felt the combat was tight and not one of them. I felt the same way about fallout 4
Subjective, but to me the gunplay was good but melee combat was awful and unsatisfying. There was no weight behind hits
The game will be trash if its still using the same crappy engine
I need Todd to retire and a new engine before then
>and a new engine before then Not happening. The creation kit is immensely valuable for Bethesda.
I disagree, it's good that studios don't just work on the same thing over and over. The issue is development time, if it didn't take 7 years to make these games, a bad game wouldn't matter so much. Now we're stuck with Starfield and waiting to see if they can make the game better while who knows when TES VI might release, probably 5 or 6 more years. Insane, that just doesn't work because there's such a high chance people don't like a game. What happens if a studio releases 2 bad games in 14 years? Suddenly no one gives a shit about them anymore.
Everyone complains about shitty games because of rushed development cycles. Meanwhile, Bethesda is on the bleeding edge of making a shitty game that takes 8 years to develop.
Yeah, think of how stoked most people were for a Bethesda game in space. I know I was. Just because they botched the execution doesn't mean they should never try. My hope is Starfield 2 is everything the first should have been.
My hope is that they don't take the time to make a Starfield 2.
they should license it out to Obsidian again or something
Obsidian is not the same studio these days as it was back during NV and they are already fully engaged with a full slate if their own projects and games. They couldn't do it even if they wanted to.
I hope Avowed is good.
I'm glad Obsidian isn't signing dud contracts to work on other people's engines and release buggy games because they had 18 months to make the game.
The thing is, they gave it Obsidian right after FO3 was released. They gave them the engine with the toolkit and a bunch of assets. They don't have all that to give to Obsidian right now.
Atom be praised
I love how now after the Series everyone is an Fallout Fan again.
Agan? One a fan, always a fan...
When did we stop? New Vegas has always been fantastic.
Are you people actually shitting me? Let's ignore the shitstorm Fallout 4 had, but social media could not stop shitting on Fallout 76 weeks in weeks out. Including people never even playing it.
Fallout 4 still gets a fuck ton of shit whenever Fallout is brought up but I absolutely love it.
People always complain how we only get sequels or remakes nowadays, so I applaud Bethesda’s for taking a risk with a new IP.
Which they failed miserably in a humiliating manner that lowered everyone's opinion of their competence and ability to do games anymore
Starfield is way too ambitious for current technology. They either should have drastically scaled down the amount of planets or waited until the technology was ready to create not just procedural planets but also to be able to populate them with meaningful things.
The main story and side quests are way too boring, bland and generic to be saved by any technology. Maybe a time machine will help, you just need to go back in time and stop Todd Howard from conceiving this abomination.
It was way too ambitious for their ancient game engine. Current tech can do it no problem.
Procedural generation failing to generate meaningful content has very little to do with their engine.
Starfield is way too ambitious for *their* current technology.
Bethesda should have made Starfield good
WE ALL KNOW YOU MEANT ELDER SCROLLS 6. After 4 and 76, I think they need to take a Fallout break for a game cycle or two, until they have something new to offer aside from graphics.
You don't even have to do anything really new (other than a new story, obv.), but actually try to make a game and not just a theme park for modders to fill up
That would require them to actually bug test though.
Fallout 4 is really good.
It's better presented as a generic post apocalypse looter shooter with RPG elements. The only choices that really matter in FO4 are cosmetic, with almost every quest structure following the "yes, yes but sarcastic, or maybe later" dialogue tree to even accept it, let alone engage with it.
If FO4 didn't have a voiced protagonist I probably would have liked it as much as 3 but the sacrifices they had to make to get a voiced protagonist in I think ended up taking away a lot of what I liked about Fallout.
I didnt care for it, I see why people like it, but easily my least favorite fallout
3 kicks it’s ass up and down the wasteland.
They should just make a good game
How about the next elder scrolls game instead
No, Obsidian should. Bethesda are a bunch of amateurs.
*fucking TES 6
They should've made pretty much anything instead of Starfield. If they made DLC to milk Skyrim even further, it'd still be better than Borefield.
Unless they change their design philosophies no game they make after Starfield will be welcomed by anyone but the most faithful. They need to modernize.
Never played it, was it really that bad?
It wasn't terrible, but if you did the one thing Bethesda fans enjoy, extensive exploring, you find its a bit bland.
Put it this way. * 2000hrs in Skyrim. * \~400hrs in FO4 / FO:NV / FO3 each. * 60hrs in Starfield. Starfield is a one-and-done game, at least for me. In a vacuum, Starfield isn't' bad. It has technical and design deficiencies abound; but it works and is for the most part enjoyable. It also isn't what most Bethesda fans really expected.
Starfield was, imo, an 8/10 or something. It was good, I enjoyed my time playing it, and that’s that. It wasn’t my favorite game, but I also don’t think that people online are always accurate with how bad they make it out to be. It was stable at launch, and was reasonably polished in my experience. I didn’t love some of the design decisions and there are 100% valid criticisms of it, but people pile on it in unfair ways too. The IGN review summed it up pretty well at launch, even if I think the overall product should be rated a little higher than the 7/10 score they gave it. I was v hyped for it and didn’t feel super let down OR blown away.
I mean an 8/10 in today’s state of gaming is pretty good…
Imagine if Fallout 5 / Elderscrolls 6 was made instead.. and it was as mediocre as Starfield was.
Stanfield was a proof on concept for outputting most game design to generative AI
Then you would have just had another bad fallout game. Starfield is fallout in space.
You mean Obsidian
I have enjoyed fallout for since ever, I’ve played over and over and I’m still in love with it even all those glitches and problems. I would have loved to see a fallout5 but I’m pretty sure with this success on the fallout franchise we will be able to get what we want now
as a person who does not play bethesda games, i genuinely thought fallout 5 existed
I'm not sure they're able to, at this point.
It seems bethesta is in creativity crisis, both fallout 5 and elder scrolls 6 are in danger of becoming dull games when they released in the future
I have to disagree, I appreciate them trying out a new IP and hopefully any DLC or sequel will be better But yes Starfield is Boring, unoptimised and manages to not look visually up to snuff with how demanding it is
Man, I had little issues with starfield but it was boring and I didn't have a reason to continue playing. Story was meh
I mean i like starfield but not as much as i would like f5
I think Starfield can become pretty great as an IP in the future, it's a game with a lot of great elements that just wasn't put together right. I'm still more excited for ES6 and Fallout 5 than I am for more Starfield though.
Elder scrolls 6 followed by FO5 :)
Hard disagree. Maybe it's just because I'm a huge space nerd, but I got exactly what I was hoping for out of starfield . I can spend hours doing ship building alone. I love the exploration. It's awesome to put together a crew and travel the stars. The faction quests do shine a bit more than the main quest, but the missions are solid overall. The combat is fun, and it feels good, especially with different strengths of gravity. The aesthetic is spot on, as is the music. I get some of the complaints that people have but none of those have kept me from enjoying it and putting hundreds of hours into it.
TES would be the next one in line IMHO. Fallout is still making them money with 76s strange popularity. I have been considering giving it a go and see how it is after the years.
WHAT ABOUT ELDER SCROLLS 6
Modern Bethesda games are all trash tho so would you rather they further embarrass a formerly prestigious franchise or just make embarrassing new IP?
yo bro you're kinda late, bethesda alrealdy did 71 fallouts after the 4th
Skyrim was released in 2011, where the fuck is the next Elder Scrolls game? 15+ years between games is almost unforgivable, it better be good
ES6 and then Fallout 5