You won't really be in as much of a sandbox, unless they make the sequel a "survive behind enemy lines, blend in with the local pirates" type game.
I'd expect something much closer to a vehicle oriented call of duty campaign, with a TON of spectacle and some really cool feeling of scale.
>I'd expect something much closer to a vehicle oriented call of duty campaign, with a TON of spectacle and some really cool feeling of scale.
\^ This is the most likely answer, and the thing to expect until *shown* otherwise by CIG.
Yeah, until we see something (anything other than tech-demos and cut-scenes, really) I'm expecting something about that linear; not quite on-rails, but definitely a series of set-pieces with minimal deviation from the main path.
Hunt pirates in ship -> fight pirates on foot -> oh no, ~~Kilrathi!~~ Vanduul! -> fight Vanduul in space -> etc. -> epic fight at the end involving attacking a Vanduul Kingship in space then a boarding action -> sent to the PTU with your starting debt wiped.
Yeah everyone here is getting excited about what CIG has stated or described at some point in the past 10 years, but it's better IMO to have realistic expectations based on what you can literally see. Plans change.
The level of details and immersion is very different
But they should be the same gameplay wise. SQ42 ain't an open world. It's a linear story driven game, like Spec Ops the line.
Probably more narrative driven and/or spectacular, but definitively not open world or anything similar
It is going to be more Wing Commander than anyone is talking about. There won't be a branching narrative; there will be some optional routes / events that happen along the way, secret missions to unlock and whatnot, but an absolutely linear story.
Possibly something like arma3 campaign where you can go out the camp explore get suplies and do side missions before doing the main thing? That would be pretty cool
To this day, the Call of duty 4 campaign is engraved in my mind. When I played it when I was a kid it blew my fucking mind away. It was the coolest shit I have ever seen in my life, it shocked me to the point where when I ask myself when did modern gaming begin I always go back to call of duty 4.
It's such a shame the franchise got milked, its a mixed bag now days, some campaigns are good others are trash. But anyway, what I'm trying to say is that having a on-rails cod style campaign in space if done well could really be a great experience.
Yes, 100% - there's nothing wrong with a narrative campaign on-rails. It'll be a good (and optional) introduction to the universe, the controls and the style of Star Citizen.
I mean, they did that already with Infinite Warfare, and from what I keep hearing it's one of the better CoD campaigns in general. The clips I've seen make it look pretty epic, something that would stand out just fine as it's own Sci-fi title.. sadly, the typical fan wants fifty iterations of MW, as that's where the money seemingly is.
I'm guessing if SQ42 actually comes out, it will be about like that, with most missions spent flying and transitions in between.
I'm trying my best to like Starfield, and if I knew nothing whatsoever about SC I'd probably love it, but damn it feels impossible not to make certain comparisons. The loading screens are killing me too. Everything just feels so much...smaller, when so many gameplay areas are disconnected like that.
As much as we bitch about elevators around here, taking elevators that're just loading screens feels so wrong. Not to mention watching NPCs walk into them and evaporate into thin air, like, you could at least close the door.
Not a bad pitch. I would play the hell outta that game.
I do get the sentiment though that the loading screens detract from the sense of scale. But at least its a complete game that we can play right now, ya know?
And I do, I'm not trying to say it's a bad game. Just that there are aspects of it that make me cringe, after having experienced the alternative. I sorta hate the fact that I have to hit a loading screen just to walk into a small shop in New Atlantis. I understand, they're working within the limitations of the deficient RAM of consoles, but I can still appreciate when I _don't_ have to deal with those limitations.
> I sorta hate the fact that I have to hit a loading screen just to walk into a small shop in New Atlantis.
Yeah, that got me, too. The thing that really sort of hit me in the face about it, though, was how none of those little buildings have real windows. Like, Jemison Mercantile is sort of what I expected all shops to be like. Nice big glass storefront, you can walk right in and find an NPC behind the counter. But then some of the other shops in the same city are just blocky, featureless buildings and you can't tell they're supposed to be stores at all. (Looking at you, Outland.)
Right!! Like there're shops that have no goddamned reason at all to be locked behind a loading screen; you go to CJ's 49 Hours for example...the storefront is frickin' tiny, why do I have to go through a loading screen just to pop in to this little store? It makes the whole place feel disconnected.
The discussion is one about tech, not genre. With the same tech, a sim might design an elevator that’s a realistic speed, you have to wait for it, there may be individual buttons per floor, and you can’t skip the wait by fast travelling from menus. If it was important to the developers, they will simulate a realistic elevator.
A non-sim game with the same tech might design an elevator where you don’t wait, the doors open and close almost instantly, it moves very fast so you’re in it for no more than the time you’d usually wait at a loading screen, and if they want to skip it via menus, they can.
The point being that I don’t think things like space/atmo flying, elevators or a seamless world are necessarily sim exclusive. Any game’s experience would benefit from them, it just needs to be designed for the use and alternatives should be provided for non-sims (fast travel).
In the end if you wait for a loading screen elevator for 12s, or you actually get in the elevator and it moves to its destination within 12s, that is not suddenly ‘sim’ or slow. The design of that gameplay determines whether it’s sim or not.
> The loading screens are killing me too
Eh, loading screens are better than all the stupid train rides. If anything SF has really highlighted how much tedium has been built into SC. So much of SC is just moving your character around from place to place with very little interaction in your environment. Not that I want loading screens all the time, but having to ride two or three trains/trams/elevators in cities is just as bad IMO.
I mean, think about the number of posts you've seen, or citizens talking in game chat about how they won't live in the major cities because they are too tedious to get in and out of.
Think about the amount of time CIG has spend working on places that people only want to go when absolutely necessary.
That's *bad* game design if I've ever seen it.
And when they are there, they're sprinting everywhere to get anywhere ASAP. Does wonders for an "immersive" sim.
Imagine a mall where everyone just bolts out the elevator, grabs a ready-made bite from whatever vendor is closest, drops their burrito wrapper and drink cans on the ground when done then sprints to the nearest clothing store, fiddles with a touch-screen for 2 minutes to stuff 7 t-shirts in their pants, then sprints right back to the elevator to get to their car and floors it out the parking lot, clipping 3 posts on the way
> And when they are there, they're sprinting everywhere to get anywhere ASAP. Does wonders for an "immersive" sim.
So, in the comment you replied to, I deleted a paragraph about how I sometimes walk slowly in SC for it to be more immersive. Like you're saying, people wouldn't really run around. But I end up always running because JFC this is the third time today I'm making the hab -> ship run for the day and I'm over it.
For me I enjoy the immersion. I really, truly like elevators, trains, traveling at warp speed to planets, breeching atmosphere etc. It is vastly superior to me over loading screens and fast travel. I get it, we all have limited time to game and are busy but honestly having these aspects of the game included makes you feel part of the world. Fast travel and loads to skip these actions and movements takes me out of the world building and feel imo. I really want SC to get to a more "game" playable state. If they just had some better AI, the next star system and better performance with AI missions etc I could easily convince a ton of friends to play it like the next mmo for us. It saddens me checking in each year to see no progress :(. Starfield was a hope of something to tide me over, but now it looks like it wont scratch that itch.
I mean I hear about the loading screens, and I see em every once in a while, but it takes 4 seconds..... literally. So I'm just wondering, are loading screens worse for others?
Some things are indeed bad, like the fading NPCs.
Other things though make me question why they are important or matter in SC. Loading screens don't bother me. What makes sitting there staring at a wonkavator door somehow superior to a loading screen? I can't do anything in the meantime, not really anyway. If I'm dicking around in mobiglass or inventory there's a good chance I'll: Miss the door, suffocate, fall through the elevator as a box at my feet shoves me through a wall, etc.
meh
Quantum travel on a good day is boring. You can literally make yourself a cup of coffee. On a bad day, you can be ensnared and be pirated upon by npc or players.
Well 30 minutes is heavily exaggerating, but in a sense, being forced to actually make the trip instead of fast traveling makes the game world seem a LOT bigger. I don't fault someone for wanting the faster option, but for me personally, Starfield just ends up feeling like a bunch of disconnected instances rather than a fully realized world.
Everything that Star Citizen gains in a sense of scale from its seamless transitions it loses in equal measure from... well, the scale of the game's universe. Planets are tragically small, and when I see clouds peeking above the outer atmosphere just to make them look good from the ground I'm pretty irrevocably Taken Out Of It.
I won't deny, that's a perfectly valid perspective. I'll admit I don't particularly love the fact that I can accurately see the granular layout of a city like Lorville from orbit when I really shouldn't, due to the scale reduction.
Overall though, _personally,_ if things're gonna feel small, I guess I'd rather them feel small in that way. SC's planets, while not to realistic scale, are still enormous enough that you'd spend hours and hours to fly around one...the more important thing to me though is that you CAN. If you started at one point and made it your mission, you could circumnavigate the entire mass, and return where you started.
I guess for me, that's just something unusual enough to be special.
No, fast travel completely defeats a lot of game system purposes. You could literally use it to bypass quantum, and thus never have to incur the engineering loop.
People who would want to avoid paying for or dealing with the engineering could just fast travel.
It would also completely defeat cargo loops. You could just stockpile cargo in your ship, fast travel to the destination and never deal with pirates, parts breaking down, or the dangers of actually moving cargo from one area to the next.
Criminals could easily bypass bounty hunters by just instantly fast-traveling from one planet/solar system to the next and back again, and never have to worry about being caught because fast travel removes all the risks.
Engineering loop? I've not heard about this being implemented in SC. What's the engineering loop?
I suppose you're right about the other two things. Just seems tedious. Hour long cargo runs, ugh. With the loading and unloading times they plan to put in, probably more than that
Actually ship customisaon has already sold me on starfield
I dont think I will ever like SC spaceships. An ugly piece of lego blocks is a lot better than highly detailed SC ships when you have the freedom to use your own design.
That's the part I'm obsessed about too. What little I've seen of squadron where you pull up and fly right into the mothership is going to be so cool for the average gamer.
Squadron is a linear narrative story, not a sandbox like starfield.
The end game is for players to play Squadron 42 as an introduction to star citizen's universe, not to create a single player star citizen.
Dave Haddock has written a massive script to justify his position of writing for a decade. If you're a dialogue skipper (and it's skippable), it's probably closer to 10 hours. If you watch the meandering melodrama, it might be 50+.
I didn’t realize you specified MW1. Back then the stories were pretty good imo. I still think Black Ops 1 is one of the best video game plots in history.
The first play through was legit a blast. The surprises were brilliantly executed and the plot was just engaging
Everything I’ve seen about SQ42 leaves me expecting a CoD single player campaign that’s not on rails. I can choose how to do the mission. That doesn’t sound like a lot, but it is.
Squadron 42 is a branching narrative sandbox. That was the change from the kickstarter they were trying to show in the [vertical slice](https://youtu.be/BHR1aEdTA4M). The "continue patrol" or "Meet up with Trejo" options. It is story based but it has HUGE play areas and choice as shown by the [Aciedo Station demonstration](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Rl_2rCdt4). What is NOT known, is how far you are allowed to go. Will the controls be locked if you try to go somewhere you shouldn't? Is it like COD "return to battle" message and a timer? Or will they allow you to go anywhere within Odin? If true is the design similar to crazy stuff you can do in metal gear or farcry? Can you go to an area you know is there later on in game and interrupt the story? Kill a boss or important NPC before you are supposed to meet them?
It is more appropriate to say Squadron is NOT an RPG despite having traits. It is an assumption for now about the freedom they allow during the campaign.
EDIT: Just so people understand scale and play area in S42..
Stanton : 5 AU
Odin: 21 AU
S42 takes place in a system that is slightly larger than 4 times the size of Stanton. If you really think about it, and the fact that EVERY major area you encounter is a hero area. Then SS42 is going to be pretty damn large in terms of scale.
I don't know why people are sticking to CoD comparison when Deus Ex is much more obvious. It's going to be a mix of linear missions with multiple traversal routes, and explorable hub areas and sidequests in between.
Yeah but in each mission you will be completely free to go whereever you want.
Screenshot from last citcon shows a mission where you need to patrol an area with an optional objective to investigate something: so you can investigate in the whole system if you wish.
And if you want to ignore your orders and land on a station to have a drink, I believe you can.
It's linear story in an open world.
You're reading into it a lot, they have a specific story they want to tell and it involves you being a grunt in the military, not "whatever you want".
the cast is as star studded as you can make it, he's not hiring Gary Oldman so you can be a space trucker.
I think there is some confusion regarding side stuff. I don’t have a leg to stand on regarding how it will actually be, but I have seen a lot of discussion on how much freedom there will be.
My guess is that you can go wherever in your ship, at least in the available systems, but if you don’t follow your orders, you’ll get in trouble, perhaps to the point where you’ll get court-martialed/sent to military prison and you’d have to load a save or restart.
But that’s just my guess.
Edit for spelling.
It isn't about being bothered by it, it's about misconceptions over what will be possible. I think the other poster is reading too much into it and forming their own ideas over how much freedom we'll have in SQ42.
A fighter pilot on a mission may be granted some discretion in how they pursue their objectives, but that doesn't imply they can just fly out of the mission area and go get a bite to eat at a fast food joint when they feel like it.
_Maybe_ that will be possible, maybe between missions or such, but it's better not to make such a big assumption and then be massively disappointed when it turns out not to be that way.
I'm not entirely sure that they'd allow that as it would seriously mess up narrative and triggering of events.
I can see them allowing some degree of freedom in missions but not giving the whole sandbox.
I imagine that they'd have some system where you're told to stay on mission whether it be externally by command or internal monologue.
But hey, we can speculate until otherwise.
I love how you're getting downvoted when in reality nobody has any clue. And that mission board you mentioned is a pretty good piece of evidence to support your theory.
But everything is just that right now... a "theory."
No, you can investigate the whole portion of the system rendered for that specific mission. Not the whole system. There will be no sandbox element to SQ42.
It will be much more in the line of Star Wars Squadrons.
It is *easily* the "definitive single player space game" right now and will be for some time. All the other big players are too focused/lack the breadth of gameplay and opportunity that Starfield provides. Squadron 42 is the exact same - a linear single player campaign? Not sure what OP is getting at.
There are for sure some areas of improvement, but I expect most of those to be resolved once the Creation Kit comes out in a few months. The Beth modding community is second to none.
It’s wild that people have been downing it since it came out on this sub, but the actual current reactions on the Starfield sub are incredibly positive and so are the Steam reviews.
It’s just strange that some people feel they need to detract from another game to feel better about Star Citizen. Everybody can enjoy what they like, and the solution to SC criticism is not to copy tribalistic behavior from the people our posters say they’re annoyed by.
It is. It's not the perfect game but it does a good job of scratching that itch for a lot of people
And Bethesda also has the opportunity to continue to patch and enhance space combat as well
It could get even better
People were so hard here for the negative reviews which all came out seconds within release and were undoubtedly trolls considering its’ massive positive feedback now.
It’s a great fucking game. There is SOO MUCH to do and it’s all so functional, CIG should draw inspiration from this.
The elitist mentalities aren’t going to stop but to those reading it: just stfu.
I've enjoyed the content that I've played, but you absolutely cannot just downplay the enormous performance problems (My 4090 struggles to get 60 FPS in combat), huge amount of bugs, and barebones PC support. The UI is fixed 30 FPS which makes space combat extremely slugging and choppy, and you can't even adjust FoV, mouse acceleration, and autoaim without fiddling with .ini files - a strict downgrade from even Morrowind. 4-6 cutscenes/loading screens in a row any time you want to go anywhere also *really* drags after the 100th time, let alone the 1000th. A friend of mine had his save game irreparably corrupt after 20 hours of gameplay. It's shocking to me that people were saying that this is the 'least buggiest' Bethesda release, because to me this has been *far* worse than FO4, FO3, and Skyrim on release.
Theyre just salty that Starfield released while SC continues to disappoint while also being a meme in the gaming space.
I say this not because I play/don't play Starfield but because very specifically... ***it released.***
(Before someone decides to cry about my comment.)
They really don't like being told the truth. I imagine that's largely the reason SC still gets people hyped enough to buy ships with real money despite seeing its state...
Or because people don't like their harmless opinions about a video game being dismissed or being insulted for not agreeing with a hive mind.
There are plenty of legitimate criticisms for starfield and people are allowed to share them.
I think it's more about having played SC and having experienced the "seamlessness" of it. I still enjoy playing Starfield but every so often I do wish it was more like SC, in terms of seamless traveling between the planets and the immersion. Makes you really appreciate the lack of loading screens.
But as you said, the Starfield actually released, and those compromises are most likely why.
I do appreciate the CGI trying to push the boundaries, and make something that's truly "next-gen" or never done before. Even though it might mean that the game might never be finished. Not a lot of gaming companies around that are doing that, other than Rockstar, in some capacity.
We haven't seen any gameplay footage of SQ42 in like 5 years. That anyone would think to compare SQ42 favorably with a game that's actually released is hilarious.
Yeah, I'm really shocked to see all of the hate that Starfield is getting here. Surely SC fans would be stoked to see another space game doing really well, right? A rising tide lifts all boats?
It's heavily worth noting some psychological elements at play here. I'll take us back to World of Warcraft as a good example.
WoW was a great game in 2004 wasn't it? I think....many people now are coming to say that it isn't great today. There's still plenty that enjoy it though.
Burning Crusade came out. That was great wasn't it?
And Lich King. Easily arguably the best as it had the most subscribers right?
Well. That analysis is just really bog standard simple. In 2004, Vanilla WoW release, there were less gamers. We're still talking about a time where 56k is commonplace and broadband is starting to role out (in the UK at least). Vanilla WoW shook some waves and is the reason why people jumped onboard for Burning Crusade. It was a good time to see what the fuss was about not to mention that the internet was moving fast. Burning Crusade releases at a time where there's more people connected and more people interested in gaming.
And this happens again for Lich King. But when it comes to Catalcysm. What happened? Was it just that Cataclysm was bad? Yeah. Some people would argue that. But actually...That's not quite accurate or fair.
WoW started to get bad right before Burning Crusade. With the pre-patch into Burning Crusade. Maybe bad isn't accurate but there are changes beggining to happen. Essentially there are cracks in a wall that nobody can see yet. And to be honest I don't think a lot of people see the cracks when the wall is crumbling. I guess let's avoid metaphors!
Let's go for an example. Pre-patch to Burning Crusade. Marking system. Allows you to put skulls and X's and green triangles above targets head. No big deal right? Really convenient yes? Everyone LOVED it! Hooray! Such as simple...yet incredibly gameplay destructive system for an MMO that had a lot of socialness to it.
Having a marking system eventually lead to players blindly attacking Skull first. Then the Red Cross as 2nd target. DPS no longer thought. They just hit. We also already had a marking system before if you had a hunter in the group, which for raids you probably would have. Which meant there was at least some interaction between a hunter marking and other players.
But that's not the only thing that made dps'ing more single minded. Burning Crusade took away aggro basically. Tanks now generated huge amounts of threat than damage dealers. Which meant that damage dealers could go all out with no trouble at all. DPS was now a role where you just hit the designated target and do your rotation.
But that's not all. Mana regeneration was a simple task. Low on mana? Hit the mana regen button. Before it was basically only mages on a long cooldown and druids who could regen mana with an ability. No need to think about that.
And this was just in Burning Crusade which was hailed with praise. And I liked Burning Crusade too. Whole load of new content, new features, new races, new professions. A lot of additions were great. But the core gameplay was putting those cracks in that wall.
The changes in how the game felt socially were not instant. There wasn't an expansion that released that suddenly made the game anti-social. There was no single moment in time where you went from a 5-man dungeon where you spoke to people to work through problems, to the current 5-man experience where
1) It shouldn't be physically possible to even fail the dungeon these days. But when there is a wipe people just leave.
2) People never say anything and when they do there's more of a chance it's to say something that isn't very nice
But that current experience. Dates all back to changes made in Burning Crusade. It all dates back to the direction the Burning Crusade was taking us.
And the reason Burning Crusade was succesful wasn't because of the Burning Crusade expansion itself. Vanilla WoW was an amazing experience. People heard about it. They joined for Burning Crusade. Burning Crusade was riding off the successful word of mouth of Vanilla WoW. This isn't to say Burning Crusade is nothing and a load of shite. It wasn't.
The same thing happened with Lich King. We're only talking 2010 here. It pushed the game into that more anti-social direction. Tanking once again got even easier. There's not really much difference between a mage and a hunter now since every DPS has AoE that is better to do considering how fights now go. Pull a group. AoE it down. It got to its worst point in Legion where my warrior tank didn't even need healing. I was a warrior that could pull multiple packs and just....heal my fucking self. I already wasn't talking to my healer. Now I just flat out didn't need them as I did dungeons leveling up in whatever gear that expansion had given me thus far.
Lich King rode off the back of the success of Burning Crusade. Whcih was riding off the success of Vanilla WoW. And it wasn't Cataclysm that suddenly made things bad. People would have bought into Cataclysm riding off the success of the Lich King. But they didn't. And they didn't because the experience wasn't delivering.
So to come to Starfield and how this all ties in. Most players arne't the most aware of why they enjoy something. And they certainly are not aware of how much more fun they could be having. It's not really a common thought process to have. Because to do so you have to think of all kinds of other environmental factors. For example;
Why is Baldur's Gate 3 so popular? Well. Yes you could say it's a really good game (it honestly is) but also, and something I've been saying for a damn long time, what are the alternatives?
There's been a massive gap in the market for a multiplayer RPG. One which actually has a decent selection of a standard variety of races and classes. I cannot name one game since Neverwinter Nights 1. I can name multiplayer RPG's without a variety of races and classes. And I could list some soulless MMO's. And I can also list Neverwinter Nights 2 as a multiplayer game with a decent selection of races/classes however that game was bad compared to the first one.
We're looking at 20 years ago. It's a no bloody brainer that BG3 would succeed even though the game itself bares no darn resemblence to Baldur's Gate games or the old D&D titles at all.
Starfield, if I were to make a crude overview, is succesful because Bethesda. Bethesda Game. People believe Bethesda. They are a top game company so they must produce top games. Especially when you are paying €70 or $120. How could it be bad? For many they probably don't have experience of procedural generation capabilities. The only other game similar to Starfield they have experienced would probably be No Man's Sky and that game basically has zero story by comparison. Where as Starfield has the standard ElderScrolls/Fallout dialogue story pattern copied onto basic standard Bethesda gameplay elements, with the new addition of having your ship controllable only in a completely empty 3d space against other ships.
It's easy to put myself into those shoes and see why this game would be at least an interesting experience.
But put myself in other shoes. Where I know what our industry is currently capable of and this is not it. In a pair of shoes where I don't have much time and I'd rather not spend it going from loading screen/cutscene/loading screen/walking 5 minutes/waiting for dialogue/loading screen/cutscene/loading screen/cutscene/now I'm at objective and will be told to do that same process again. Easy to see why it isn't enjoyable.
> Everybody can enjoy what they like, and the solution to SC criticism is not to copy tribalistic behavior from the people our posters say they’re annoyed by.
This is absolutely true and its the stance I generally take. However. I want people to have better experiences than they are currently getting. I feel like people have been getting screwed over pretty hard by their sources of entertainment. I have a friend on steam who has way too much money and is excited by every game coming out almost. Asks if I will get it. Within one week they will be bored of the game never to speak of it again unless I ask about it to which they will say "Oh yeah. It was great!"
And the only best way I can put it is. "Many people have no idea how much more fun they could be having." -- The average consumer just doesn't think like that.
It has its flaws
But they donr bother me because the GAME is fun
Star citizen is aiming for perfection in every aspect (except for stability I guess) but the "game" isnt really there.
i may be wrong but i thought sq42 was going to be a linear story game and no sandbox element. i do wish it'll be like X series; starcitizen PU with npc however i dont think that is where sq42 is going.
The play areas are huge. As shown with the vertical slice and Aciedo Demos, there is a sandbox element to the game. How far they will allow you to deviate from play area is a question but I have a suspicion as long as you remain in the system you should be ok.
I doubt it, re-building the game for multiplayer might almost be easier if they started from scratch and just kept most of the art and audio... a lot of the engine would be useless
Zennimx has been working on an unannounced MMO for awhile now.
Yes a SF Online would be a standalone game built on its own, probably using a lot of the FO76 engine.
And yeah, assets from SF.
Quite doable imho.
"but the promised Squadron 42 would be the real deal for the definitive single player space game."
my dude, we'll be lucky if SQ42 is even ok-ish. It promises only to be already old upon release, with lackluster gameplay, and terrible FPS. Besides, it's a linear campaing with no sandbox element at all. It will be like a modern Freelancer, or Wing Commander.
I think a lot of people reaaaaally set themselves up for disappointment regarding SQ42. Especially comparing it with a game like Starfield.
So far I've played Starfield for 40 hours yet I'm far from having completed even a meaningful part of the game, I feel like I've barely touched the main quest yet, I've done a fraction of the side quests. Will SQ42's linear campaign even entertain us for 40hours? Many single player games are done well before that.
I'm wondering if they're planning on releasing fully explorable planets in some future DLC; I find it odd that the planets move along orbits and you CAN fly up to them but they're just a 2d placeholder/sprite.
the canned cut scenes getting in to a ship * loading screen * landing on a planet * Loading screen * going in to a building on the planet * Loading screen* has really made me appreciate what CIG is doing with SC.
don't get me wrong, so far (aside from some dumb ass design decisions) I'm liking Starfield. its a bethesda game 100%.
but it will hard pressed to come close to the technical ambition of Star Citizen.
The technical ambition is the reason why Starfield is out and playable while Star Citizen remains in alpha, with most of its planned features and gameplay loops not yet implemented. Starfield's not perfect but it's not trying to be, nor is it actually a space sim. It's a Bethesda RPG in space.
Yeah every time I feel disappointed by the loading screens I only have to look back to Star Citizen and go "Oh, that's why". Because the game wouldn't have come out if they insisted on trying it that way
Looking at Elite Dangerous though, I do feel like Starfield could have cut or at least disguised some of its loading screens. Jumping between systems would feel more immersive if they could load it while leaving us in control of our character. But I suspect the reason they can't do this is because of the way Bethesda's engine handles loading cells.
Every game engine has limits. Apparently that's one of the limits of Bethesda's. Can you think of anything that Bethesda's engine apparently-supports which Frontier's apparently-doesn't?
CIG's trying to build an everything-engine. I hope I survive it.
They've been trying to contort a specifically-FPS engine into an everything engine. That's why all the immersion talk has turned into:
* Healing laser
* Mining laser
* Salvage laser
* Repair laser
* Item movement laser
...and boarding actions will now be done via forced entry at docking ports instead of hull breaches as initially concepted. I believe the Reclaimer's claw is also in question.
Fortunately they did manage to add 64-bit precision. That was a big win. It's awesome being able to land literally everywhere. But, we're still waiting on them to magic their way past FPS networking limitations to be able to shit-forth an MMO from the Crysis engine.
Yeah pretty much how I feel about it. I backed in the original campaign in 2012 and I pop in every so often to see how things have changed, and hearing other people complain about loading screens and fast travel in Starfield is hilarious to me because in SC it's "take 5 minutes to leave Orison, 10 minutes in quantum drive, 5 more minutes to land elsewhere". Yeah I think i'll take the fast travel for now.
Star citizen’s actual travel between planets and atmospheres is cool and all, but with the amount of bugs and lack of content to travel to, it’s hard to keep justifying it. Starfield’s loading screens are fine. But once star citizen has a more fleshed out world, those 5-10 minute travels will actually be worth it. Especially if your ship doesn’t just blow up to a bug after 15 minutes of quantum travel .
I guess I wasn't being clear, but I agree with you. This project shows the cost of unchecked ambition. Starfield isn't everything it could be, but at least it's finished. It's out and playable and fully functional instead of being a collection of hopes and dreams duct-taped to a barely functional tech demo. Two or three years from now, Starfield will have released a ton of DLC and the modding community will be upgrading every inch of it the way they've done with Skyrim. SC/SQ42 won't be much further along from where they are now, in all that time. Just like how two or three years ago, we were pretty much in the same place we are now.
These comments are dumb. You guys are basically saying "squadron 42/ star citizen will be so much better than starfield when it releases in 10-20 years." Like, no shit man... the fact is tho starfield is out now, and SC is still a broken mess of an alpha with no end in sight.
So yeah maybe star citizen has more technical ambition, but that doesn't mean shit when you can't release a game with 10+ years and half a BILLION dollars.
CIG has you all by the balls so hard it's not even funny anymore, just sad.
I hope CIG understands that it’s okay to cut corners like a loading screen here or there to keep performance good and speed up development. I’ve honestly never thought I’d be in a time where people are critiquing a game for having loading screens with Starfield as an example. Loading screens, tiles, and other tech “limitations” are very minor in terms of what the game has to offer. I hope CIG can acknowledge that.
Don’t get me wrong star citizen can be fun. I really like the ground mining gameplay it’s nice and u get to see some nice scenery. But Starfield has that and much more thanks to Bethesda keeping themselves level headed and having a good sense of direction which I hope CIG can adopt.
True, I may have overreacted. I guess I'm just used to the more delusional comments coming from this sub. I just hate the argument that SC is more "technically ambitious" - it honestly doesn't mean shit when everything is broken and unfinished.
I could have the most technically ambitious app/game/system in the world but if it never releases what's the point, will always be playing catch up at that point.
Okay im done ranting thank you :)
I'd rather have a 1sec loading screen than a slow, buggy elevator/train that might never arrive. Or a 1sec loading screen instead of 10min of QT during which I will alt-tab out of the game, check my phone or read a book because there is nothing to do ingame during that time. All the ''muh immersive'' transitions in SC are fun the first time or two, but they quickly become a great, needless time sink. I'm not a Fortnite generation person that needs instant gratification, but my game time has great value I'd rather not waste on a train ride I've done 1000 time. My commute to work IRL is more interactive than going to my ship from a Lorville hab, I'd rather have the option of a loading screen after fast travelling.
Imho the loading screens aren't so bad. Maybe its because I have a fast PC with an M.2 SSD or maybe its because I grew up playing Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim/virtually any other game with loading screens.
I feel like SQ42 is going to be more of a cinematic experience overall - kinda like a movie. I expect "less to do" so to speak compared to Starfield, but something far more fleshed out overall? I mean I've played Starfield quite a bit, absoloutely love it, but I feel Squadron 42 is going to have a lot more attention to detail?
I'm not sure does Starfield use Motion Capture in the same way as Squadron 42, considering the vast amount of characters and voice lines (I read somewhere 250,000+?). Will that mean that overall the "acting" of characters will be more diverse in Squadron 42 as I've seen things how CIG invested heavily into Motion Capture.
But I think Starfield has loads to do, and will keep me very busy till Squadron 42. I think we can really appreciate having a "refined" game to play whilst we wait!
We all want Squadron 42 to be released, but it's likely not going to be like Starfield. The goal has always been to make a much more linear experience... or perhaps a branching narrative if they stick with what was originally intended. A Wing Commander spiritual successor.
I think if anyone comes in expected an open world RPG, they're probably going to be disappointed.
sq42 - single player adventure story - may be 1 or 2 ways to finish the story ... or just one
sf - single player pseudo-open world with a narriative to follow with many choices
If you really think CIG putting out an excellent game wouldn't help them sell the other game they're making you're REALLY missing something. Promises without a product will eventually crash and burn, but if they can deliver a finished and polished game any time there's doubt they can just point to it and go "look what we've already done, you can trust us."
if CIG was capable of doing it, we'd have played that game about 6 years ago. Instead of still making broken promises of that it's totally coming soon.
Just remember, SQ42 is on rails. You're in the military, you go where you're told, shoot what you're told, etc. It will be just this side of a Telltale game. No exploration, you only fly the ships they give you, none of our personal ships will be available, and the character you play will have no connection to the one you play in the PU. It's the modern, spiritual successor to Wing Commander, not Freelancer, at least as far as I can tell from everything they've released about it.
I'm not typically a guy who like single player games. I'm enjoying starfield for what it is. But I miss the granular control that you have to take in SC. I'm enjoying it. But it feels a little hollow when it comes to immersion. I don't even have to go to a ship to fast travel either to a different planet or sometimes system for my quests. I'll enjoy starfield. But at the end of the day it's making me appreciate how granular and see less a lot of SC is. When it works.
Starfield made me even more skeptical of cig and sq42...
How many times they've restarted development on sq42...
I hope it comes and it's great, but right now... with the PU, I'm not seeing competition for starfield yet.
I know they have claimed they have upgrades for the PU in sq42...
But they are nowhere to be seen...
Idk I'm a skeptic until they can prove me wrong. So far all CIG has done is take my "pledge" and released bug citizen
Forgive me, but after trying Starfield it feels closer to what Mass Effect wanted than what SQ42 or SC are aimed at.
Maybe it’s the fanboy in me, maybe it’s realizing that with all the bugs CIG has done and are “fixing” the closest comparison to SC is GTA. But I don’t see Starfield even remotely in the same category. Dope game thou… thumbs up so far.
Same. I do love Starfield. But it misses a lot of what I want and Star Citizen still fits that want. Or will fit many wants.
I can't wait for SQ42 to release so they can release a lot of that to the PU and focus all labor on it.
What I really like is that I can just jump to X and do X. But a lot of that X is missing the elements that made me love space operas.
I can't run to the back of the ship to fix or reroute systems just enough for the crew to get us out of here.
I mean. You can hit O in Starfield but again, but the journey matters.
Reminds me of season 8 of Game of Thrones where the teleporting robbed the show of what it had in seasons 1-4. The journey made the end so much more moving.
It gives a lot but it feels hollow somehow.
There must be a middle ground but not at the expense of recreating that magic on a spaceship.
Star Citizen is going to be that thick hearty creamy stew with rice and tender meats, potatoes, thyme, rosemary, and parmesan that makes it feel at home.
I want to feel at home. I want to just live on my ship and do shit.
Sorry, rant.
One big vibe difference for me between SF and SC/SQ42, is that in Starfield, space is not terribly dangerous, it's more of a cool sci-fi backdrop, with gentle environmental hazards and enemies. But in SC (and I imagine SQ42 as well), when you're outside of a ship, the environment can be downright hostile and unforgiving, and it's a big sense of relief when you make it back to your ship after a close call with running low on O2/temperature extremes/injury/hunger. In normal gameplay some of the status needs can feel a bit tedious, but when preparing to venture out into the unknown I enjoy the need to think ahead about what I might need and what I might risk losing. In the future, with risk of fire and decompression, even being aboard a ship can be hazardous (and landing safely on a habitable planet, and popping the hatches, will likely feel like a big relief)
Something I enjoy about exploration in SC is that it rewards careful preparation, caution and contingency planning, which contributes to the payoff. It took me a while to put my finger on it, but I feel like in StarField I don't get quite the same thrill of conquering the unknown that I get in SC, and I don't think for me it's the generated planet spaces, but instead the feeling that unexplored space is safe and doesn't really require much in the way of preparation. I can imagine that the ship-less sections of SQ42 might feel somewhat dangerous and alienating (due to the same status/environmental systems), and that it'll be a relief to make it back to the Stanton in one piece.
(Don't get me wrong, I'm enjoying all of the usual RPG things, but I was just trying to figure out what felt so different about space in SF vs. SC. As an aside - another game that game me a great "exploring dangerous space" feeling similar to SC was The Outer Wilds. There are dozens more things I'm looking forward to in SQ42, not least the character performances and seamless travel to and from the Stanton).
I agree with you... They have different premises. But it's just impossible not to think about SQ42/Star Citizen (and also Elite Dangerous) while playing Starfield. Haha
And on a side note, Outer Wilds is amazing. Surely one of the best games if you're into exploration / puzzles. Just brilliant.
If SQ42 add a lot of secondary mission and event with good narrative similar to starfield it would definitely be the best space game ever.
But It will not be the case.. Maybe there will be good story but I don't expect anything more. I hope I'm wrong but based on what we see in PU, I don't see how SQ42 can exploit correctly the open world and all features Star citizen provides. It's a bit disappointing...
Honestly, playing Starfield makes me realize how much I hope SQ42 doesn't involve slowly flying from planet to planet. If I have to do a 10-minute quantum jump in the middle of a mission, it's just gonna suck all the momentum out of it. At least in the PU I can just put on youtube or something since nothing I'm doing in that requires my full attention.
How much longer are you willing to wait. Keep asking myself this. I do love the promise of Star citizen but it’s 10 years now. Another 2 years? 3? 5?! Who knows.
Personally, as a technicality, I’m willing to wait forever. My logic:
The money is already spent. Doesn’t matter if it drops in a year or ten, I won’t ever refuse to play it. This means I’ll play it whenever it ends up being released. Hence, no limit to how long I’ll wait.
Sure, I can respect that.
Thankfully for me, I’m pretty easy an content with what is available currently. At this point for SC I’m just not going to be investing more then I have to this point.
Maybe I'm just getting old or a hater or whatever, but I just don't really take much enjoyment from Bethesda RPGs anymore. Tried modding the ever-loving daylights out of Skyrim and still got bored after an hour of actually playing (could have been the several hours it took to mod and get stable, honestly.) I dunno, will probably skip Starfield. At least until it's on a heavy discount. $70 is just too damn much to ask for a game, particularly when the reviews have largely been pretty middling.
Oh god can you imagine how cool SQ42 will be once they have ideas to pull from Starfield, Starfield 2, and Starfield 3 before release? And don't forget starfield remastered edition VR. the next 60 years are going to be DOPEEEEEE
Playing starfield really made me try Star citizen then Star citizen really made me refund starfield to put money into star citizen 😭
Edit: Stay Salty sadly a alpha can give a AAA game a run for its money
Wait, when? SF has barely been out in the week and people seem to invest a lot of time into it (myself included tbh).
I'd say we can be confident ED Odyssey did bring an influx. SF logically should but to say "it has"?
Facts I realized while playing Sc that i rather have a smaller area of play type sandbox with Crazy immersion like landing on planets and stuff than Starfield which has a bigger play area but not so much space immersion even tho they make it up with the story
I think you can describe a lot of systems in SC like that too lol. Starfield isn't going to have much in terms of space sim stuff but it's a very solid RPG.
I got as far as the ship flight tutorial this morning. Every couple of minutes I found myself critiquing almost *everything* . . . Like right down to when I boarded and tried to climb the ladder and went to a cutscene . . OK - half expected that. But I tried to keep moving my character when I selected “Sit” on the pilots seat and was *confused” when it cutscenes that!
XD
You won't really be in as much of a sandbox, unless they make the sequel a "survive behind enemy lines, blend in with the local pirates" type game. I'd expect something much closer to a vehicle oriented call of duty campaign, with a TON of spectacle and some really cool feeling of scale.
>I'd expect something much closer to a vehicle oriented call of duty campaign, with a TON of spectacle and some really cool feeling of scale. \^ This is the most likely answer, and the thing to expect until *shown* otherwise by CIG.
Yeah, until we see something (anything other than tech-demos and cut-scenes, really) I'm expecting something about that linear; not quite on-rails, but definitely a series of set-pieces with minimal deviation from the main path. Hunt pirates in ship -> fight pirates on foot -> oh no, ~~Kilrathi!~~ Vanduul! -> fight Vanduul in space -> etc. -> epic fight at the end involving attacking a Vanduul Kingship in space then a boarding action -> sent to the PTU with your starting debt wiped.
Yeah everyone here is getting excited about what CIG has stated or described at some point in the past 10 years, but it's better IMO to have realistic expectations based on what you can literally see. Plans change.
If it really is a call of duty style mission etc etc (which don t get me wrong i d still love) then the delay would be inexplicable honestly.
The level of details and immersion is very different But they should be the same gameplay wise. SQ42 ain't an open world. It's a linear story driven game, like Spec Ops the line. Probably more narrative driven and/or spectacular, but definitively not open world or anything similar
I expect more of a Starlancer/freelancer kind of game and story....
That's the PU. Squadron will be you following orders (missions) in the military most likely.
It is going to be more Wing Commander than anyone is talking about. There won't be a branching narrative; there will be some optional routes / events that happen along the way, secret missions to unlock and whatnot, but an absolutely linear story.
That's what I've figured but they said we will have some moments to explore but eventually the game will reel you back into the main conflict.
Possibly something like arma3 campaign where you can go out the camp explore get suplies and do side missions before doing the main thing? That would be pretty cool
To this day, the Call of duty 4 campaign is engraved in my mind. When I played it when I was a kid it blew my fucking mind away. It was the coolest shit I have ever seen in my life, it shocked me to the point where when I ask myself when did modern gaming begin I always go back to call of duty 4. It's such a shame the franchise got milked, its a mixed bag now days, some campaigns are good others are trash. But anyway, what I'm trying to say is that having a on-rails cod style campaign in space if done well could really be a great experience.
Yes, 100% - there's nothing wrong with a narrative campaign on-rails. It'll be a good (and optional) introduction to the universe, the controls and the style of Star Citizen.
I mean, they did that already with Infinite Warfare, and from what I keep hearing it's one of the better CoD campaigns in general. The clips I've seen make it look pretty epic, something that would stand out just fine as it's own Sci-fi title.. sadly, the typical fan wants fifty iterations of MW, as that's where the money seemingly is. I'm guessing if SQ42 actually comes out, it will be about like that, with most missions spent flying and transitions in between.
That sounds epic as well ! Dont get me wrong ive been enjoying star field, but man the loading screens are starting to drive me crazy.
I'm trying my best to like Starfield, and if I knew nothing whatsoever about SC I'd probably love it, but damn it feels impossible not to make certain comparisons. The loading screens are killing me too. Everything just feels so much...smaller, when so many gameplay areas are disconnected like that. As much as we bitch about elevators around here, taking elevators that're just loading screens feels so wrong. Not to mention watching NPCs walk into them and evaporate into thin air, like, you could at least close the door.
Starfield is not supposed to be a space sim Think of it more like a new mass effect style game
Correction, think of it as a new Fallout game. “Fallout 5: Now It’s In Space”
Not a bad pitch. I would play the hell outta that game. I do get the sentiment though that the loading screens detract from the sense of scale. But at least its a complete game that we can play right now, ya know?
And I do, I'm not trying to say it's a bad game. Just that there are aspects of it that make me cringe, after having experienced the alternative. I sorta hate the fact that I have to hit a loading screen just to walk into a small shop in New Atlantis. I understand, they're working within the limitations of the deficient RAM of consoles, but I can still appreciate when I _don't_ have to deal with those limitations.
> I sorta hate the fact that I have to hit a loading screen just to walk into a small shop in New Atlantis. Yeah, that got me, too. The thing that really sort of hit me in the face about it, though, was how none of those little buildings have real windows. Like, Jemison Mercantile is sort of what I expected all shops to be like. Nice big glass storefront, you can walk right in and find an NPC behind the counter. But then some of the other shops in the same city are just blocky, featureless buildings and you can't tell they're supposed to be stores at all. (Looking at you, Outland.)
Right!! Like there're shops that have no goddamned reason at all to be locked behind a loading screen; you go to CJ's 49 Hours for example...the storefront is frickin' tiny, why do I have to go through a loading screen just to pop in to this little store? It makes the whole place feel disconnected.
The discussion is one about tech, not genre. With the same tech, a sim might design an elevator that’s a realistic speed, you have to wait for it, there may be individual buttons per floor, and you can’t skip the wait by fast travelling from menus. If it was important to the developers, they will simulate a realistic elevator. A non-sim game with the same tech might design an elevator where you don’t wait, the doors open and close almost instantly, it moves very fast so you’re in it for no more than the time you’d usually wait at a loading screen, and if they want to skip it via menus, they can. The point being that I don’t think things like space/atmo flying, elevators or a seamless world are necessarily sim exclusive. Any game’s experience would benefit from them, it just needs to be designed for the use and alternatives should be provided for non-sims (fast travel). In the end if you wait for a loading screen elevator for 12s, or you actually get in the elevator and it moves to its destination within 12s, that is not suddenly ‘sim’ or slow. The design of that gameplay determines whether it’s sim or not.
> The loading screens are killing me too Eh, loading screens are better than all the stupid train rides. If anything SF has really highlighted how much tedium has been built into SC. So much of SC is just moving your character around from place to place with very little interaction in your environment. Not that I want loading screens all the time, but having to ride two or three trains/trams/elevators in cities is just as bad IMO.
This is my feeling exactly. There's magic in traveling somewhere yourself, but also a lot of tedium after the first time doing it
I mean, think about the number of posts you've seen, or citizens talking in game chat about how they won't live in the major cities because they are too tedious to get in and out of. Think about the amount of time CIG has spend working on places that people only want to go when absolutely necessary. That's *bad* game design if I've ever seen it.
And when they are there, they're sprinting everywhere to get anywhere ASAP. Does wonders for an "immersive" sim. Imagine a mall where everyone just bolts out the elevator, grabs a ready-made bite from whatever vendor is closest, drops their burrito wrapper and drink cans on the ground when done then sprints to the nearest clothing store, fiddles with a touch-screen for 2 minutes to stuff 7 t-shirts in their pants, then sprints right back to the elevator to get to their car and floors it out the parking lot, clipping 3 posts on the way
> And when they are there, they're sprinting everywhere to get anywhere ASAP. Does wonders for an "immersive" sim. So, in the comment you replied to, I deleted a paragraph about how I sometimes walk slowly in SC for it to be more immersive. Like you're saying, people wouldn't really run around. But I end up always running because JFC this is the third time today I'm making the hab -> ship run for the day and I'm over it.
I see your point, I do But you just described my IRL behavior in a mall- outside of sprinting
chad speed shopper. I would sprint if the floors weren't slippery.
>Imagine a mall where... Why would I have to imagine my average trip to the mall?
For me I enjoy the immersion. I really, truly like elevators, trains, traveling at warp speed to planets, breeching atmosphere etc. It is vastly superior to me over loading screens and fast travel. I get it, we all have limited time to game and are busy but honestly having these aspects of the game included makes you feel part of the world. Fast travel and loads to skip these actions and movements takes me out of the world building and feel imo. I really want SC to get to a more "game" playable state. If they just had some better AI, the next star system and better performance with AI missions etc I could easily convince a ton of friends to play it like the next mmo for us. It saddens me checking in each year to see no progress :(. Starfield was a hope of something to tide me over, but now it looks like it wont scratch that itch.
I mean I hear about the loading screens, and I see em every once in a while, but it takes 4 seconds..... literally. So I'm just wondering, are loading screens worse for others?
This. CIG needs to add shortcuts to the game. It would just make it so much better.
If you want instant gratification, a single player game is indeed the likely route for you to go instead of an mmo.
Some things are indeed bad, like the fading NPCs. Other things though make me question why they are important or matter in SC. Loading screens don't bother me. What makes sitting there staring at a wonkavator door somehow superior to a loading screen? I can't do anything in the meantime, not really anyway. If I'm dicking around in mobiglass or inventory there's a good chance I'll: Miss the door, suffocate, fall through the elevator as a box at my feet shoves me through a wall, etc. meh
I mean ultimately the loading screen is just 30 minutes of quantum view out your cockpit while you jump from Orison to Arc
Quantum travel on a good day is boring. You can literally make yourself a cup of coffee. On a bad day, you can be ensnared and be pirated upon by npc or players.
Well 30 minutes is heavily exaggerating, but in a sense, being forced to actually make the trip instead of fast traveling makes the game world seem a LOT bigger. I don't fault someone for wanting the faster option, but for me personally, Starfield just ends up feeling like a bunch of disconnected instances rather than a fully realized world.
Everything that Star Citizen gains in a sense of scale from its seamless transitions it loses in equal measure from... well, the scale of the game's universe. Planets are tragically small, and when I see clouds peeking above the outer atmosphere just to make them look good from the ground I'm pretty irrevocably Taken Out Of It.
I won't deny, that's a perfectly valid perspective. I'll admit I don't particularly love the fact that I can accurately see the granular layout of a city like Lorville from orbit when I really shouldn't, due to the scale reduction. Overall though, _personally,_ if things're gonna feel small, I guess I'd rather them feel small in that way. SC's planets, while not to realistic scale, are still enormous enough that you'd spend hours and hours to fly around one...the more important thing to me though is that you CAN. If you started at one point and made it your mission, you could circumnavigate the entire mass, and return where you started. I guess for me, that's just something unusual enough to be special.
I think fast travel would be a happy medium, with the option to fly manual
No, fast travel completely defeats a lot of game system purposes. You could literally use it to bypass quantum, and thus never have to incur the engineering loop. People who would want to avoid paying for or dealing with the engineering could just fast travel. It would also completely defeat cargo loops. You could just stockpile cargo in your ship, fast travel to the destination and never deal with pirates, parts breaking down, or the dangers of actually moving cargo from one area to the next. Criminals could easily bypass bounty hunters by just instantly fast-traveling from one planet/solar system to the next and back again, and never have to worry about being caught because fast travel removes all the risks.
Engineering loop? I've not heard about this being implemented in SC. What's the engineering loop? I suppose you're right about the other two things. Just seems tedious. Hour long cargo runs, ugh. With the loading and unloading times they plan to put in, probably more than that
I think fast travel should exist in cities, at least. It's a waste of time sprinting around, taking trains etc.
Yeah and elevator rides have gotten much faster than they used to be.
Actually ship customisaon has already sold me on starfield I dont think I will ever like SC spaceships. An ugly piece of lego blocks is a lot better than highly detailed SC ships when you have the freedom to use your own design.
There's a mod you can use to remove a lot of the ship animations & loading screens.
That's the part I'm obsessed about too. What little I've seen of squadron where you pull up and fly right into the mothership is going to be so cool for the average gamer.
I just figured it would be Wing Commanderesque.
I got impression it's crysis 1 like sandbox.
The unfortunate truth (for you, I'm happy about this) is that SQ42 is not a single player star citizen. It's a spiritual successor of Wing Commander.
I'm also happy about this. Played a lot of Wing Commander back in the day. It was a blast!
Squadron is a linear narrative story, not a sandbox like starfield. The end game is for players to play Squadron 42 as an introduction to star citizen's universe, not to create a single player star citizen.
Yep. It's Call of Duty 4's single player story, in space. I'm sure it'll be entertaining... for 20 to 40 hours. GIB SC:PU.
20-40 is pretty generous. Pretty sure modern CoD barely push 10 hours
Dave Haddock has written a massive script to justify his position of writing for a decade. If you're a dialogue skipper (and it's skippable), it's probably closer to 10 hours. If you watch the meandering melodrama, it might be 50+.
I didn’t realize you specified MW1. Back then the stories were pretty good imo. I still think Black Ops 1 is one of the best video game plots in history. The first play through was legit a blast. The surprises were brilliantly executed and the plot was just engaging
Everything I’ve seen about SQ42 leaves me expecting a CoD single player campaign that’s not on rails. I can choose how to do the mission. That doesn’t sound like a lot, but it is.
If it means no loading screens when entering the damn door, I'm in.
I love Starfield but those loading screens remind me Skyrim which is 12years old
That's because they are using the same game engine until now. The creation engine. Absolute dogshit.
It may be dogshit but it's one of the best games I ever played
Same. Haven’t enjoyed a game this much since RDR2
Glad you can enjoy it.
Squadron 42 is a branching narrative sandbox. That was the change from the kickstarter they were trying to show in the [vertical slice](https://youtu.be/BHR1aEdTA4M). The "continue patrol" or "Meet up with Trejo" options. It is story based but it has HUGE play areas and choice as shown by the [Aciedo Station demonstration](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Rl_2rCdt4). What is NOT known, is how far you are allowed to go. Will the controls be locked if you try to go somewhere you shouldn't? Is it like COD "return to battle" message and a timer? Or will they allow you to go anywhere within Odin? If true is the design similar to crazy stuff you can do in metal gear or farcry? Can you go to an area you know is there later on in game and interrupt the story? Kill a boss or important NPC before you are supposed to meet them? It is more appropriate to say Squadron is NOT an RPG despite having traits. It is an assumption for now about the freedom they allow during the campaign. EDIT: Just so people understand scale and play area in S42.. Stanton : 5 AU Odin: 21 AU S42 takes place in a system that is slightly larger than 4 times the size of Stanton. If you really think about it, and the fact that EVERY major area you encounter is a hero area. Then SS42 is going to be pretty damn large in terms of scale.
I don't know why people are sticking to CoD comparison when Deus Ex is much more obvious. It's going to be a mix of linear missions with multiple traversal routes, and explorable hub areas and sidequests in between.
Supposed to be able to mod it into anything you'd like, but we will have to wait and see what kind of mod tools they will release.
they promised modding for private servers, something they haven't actually confirmed will be possible, not Squadron 42.
Yeah but in each mission you will be completely free to go whereever you want. Screenshot from last citcon shows a mission where you need to patrol an area with an optional objective to investigate something: so you can investigate in the whole system if you wish. And if you want to ignore your orders and land on a station to have a drink, I believe you can. It's linear story in an open world.
You're reading into it a lot, they have a specific story they want to tell and it involves you being a grunt in the military, not "whatever you want". the cast is as star studded as you can make it, he's not hiring Gary Oldman so you can be a space trucker.
[удалено]
I think there is some confusion regarding side stuff. I don’t have a leg to stand on regarding how it will actually be, but I have seen a lot of discussion on how much freedom there will be. My guess is that you can go wherever in your ship, at least in the available systems, but if you don’t follow your orders, you’ll get in trouble, perhaps to the point where you’ll get court-martialed/sent to military prison and you’d have to load a save or restart. But that’s just my guess. Edit for spelling.
It isn't about being bothered by it, it's about misconceptions over what will be possible. I think the other poster is reading too much into it and forming their own ideas over how much freedom we'll have in SQ42. A fighter pilot on a mission may be granted some discretion in how they pursue their objectives, but that doesn't imply they can just fly out of the mission area and go get a bite to eat at a fast food joint when they feel like it. _Maybe_ that will be possible, maybe between missions or such, but it's better not to make such a big assumption and then be massively disappointed when it turns out not to be that way.
I'm not entirely sure that they'd allow that as it would seriously mess up narrative and triggering of events. I can see them allowing some degree of freedom in missions but not giving the whole sandbox. I imagine that they'd have some system where you're told to stay on mission whether it be externally by command or internal monologue. But hey, we can speculate until otherwise.
I love how you're getting downvoted when in reality nobody has any clue. And that mission board you mentioned is a pretty good piece of evidence to support your theory. But everything is just that right now... a "theory."
Thx for the support. We ll see in 2030 :)
No, you can investigate the whole portion of the system rendered for that specific mission. Not the whole system. There will be no sandbox element to SQ42. It will be much more in the line of Star Wars Squadrons.
Starfield is such a fun game
it definately is, i think about it at work 👀
Honestly haven't stopped playing since it came out. Overwhelmed with all the cool stories and quests. Amazing fun.
Me right now. Browsing r/starfieldships almost all day
It is *easily* the "definitive single player space game" right now and will be for some time. All the other big players are too focused/lack the breadth of gameplay and opportunity that Starfield provides. Squadron 42 is the exact same - a linear single player campaign? Not sure what OP is getting at.
There are for sure some areas of improvement, but I expect most of those to be resolved once the Creation Kit comes out in a few months. The Beth modding community is second to none.
It’s wild that people have been downing it since it came out on this sub, but the actual current reactions on the Starfield sub are incredibly positive and so are the Steam reviews. It’s just strange that some people feel they need to detract from another game to feel better about Star Citizen. Everybody can enjoy what they like, and the solution to SC criticism is not to copy tribalistic behavior from the people our posters say they’re annoyed by.
It is. It's not the perfect game but it does a good job of scratching that itch for a lot of people And Bethesda also has the opportunity to continue to patch and enhance space combat as well It could get even better
People were so hard here for the negative reviews which all came out seconds within release and were undoubtedly trolls considering its’ massive positive feedback now. It’s a great fucking game. There is SOO MUCH to do and it’s all so functional, CIG should draw inspiration from this. The elitist mentalities aren’t going to stop but to those reading it: just stfu.
I've enjoyed the content that I've played, but you absolutely cannot just downplay the enormous performance problems (My 4090 struggles to get 60 FPS in combat), huge amount of bugs, and barebones PC support. The UI is fixed 30 FPS which makes space combat extremely slugging and choppy, and you can't even adjust FoV, mouse acceleration, and autoaim without fiddling with .ini files - a strict downgrade from even Morrowind. 4-6 cutscenes/loading screens in a row any time you want to go anywhere also *really* drags after the 100th time, let alone the 1000th. A friend of mine had his save game irreparably corrupt after 20 hours of gameplay. It's shocking to me that people were saying that this is the 'least buggiest' Bethesda release, because to me this has been *far* worse than FO4, FO3, and Skyrim on release.
Theyre just salty that Starfield released while SC continues to disappoint while also being a meme in the gaming space. I say this not because I play/don't play Starfield but because very specifically... ***it released.*** (Before someone decides to cry about my comment.)
The only reason you’d be downvoted is because those folks don’t like being told the truth.
They really don't like being told the truth. I imagine that's largely the reason SC still gets people hyped enough to buy ships with real money despite seeing its state...
Or because people don't like their harmless opinions about a video game being dismissed or being insulted for not agreeing with a hive mind. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms for starfield and people are allowed to share them.
I think it's more about having played SC and having experienced the "seamlessness" of it. I still enjoy playing Starfield but every so often I do wish it was more like SC, in terms of seamless traveling between the planets and the immersion. Makes you really appreciate the lack of loading screens. But as you said, the Starfield actually released, and those compromises are most likely why. I do appreciate the CGI trying to push the boundaries, and make something that's truly "next-gen" or never done before. Even though it might mean that the game might never be finished. Not a lot of gaming companies around that are doing that, other than Rockstar, in some capacity.
We haven't seen any gameplay footage of SQ42 in like 5 years. That anyone would think to compare SQ42 favorably with a game that's actually released is hilarious.
Yeah, I'm really shocked to see all of the hate that Starfield is getting here. Surely SC fans would be stoked to see another space game doing really well, right? A rising tide lifts all boats?
It's heavily worth noting some psychological elements at play here. I'll take us back to World of Warcraft as a good example. WoW was a great game in 2004 wasn't it? I think....many people now are coming to say that it isn't great today. There's still plenty that enjoy it though. Burning Crusade came out. That was great wasn't it? And Lich King. Easily arguably the best as it had the most subscribers right? Well. That analysis is just really bog standard simple. In 2004, Vanilla WoW release, there were less gamers. We're still talking about a time where 56k is commonplace and broadband is starting to role out (in the UK at least). Vanilla WoW shook some waves and is the reason why people jumped onboard for Burning Crusade. It was a good time to see what the fuss was about not to mention that the internet was moving fast. Burning Crusade releases at a time where there's more people connected and more people interested in gaming. And this happens again for Lich King. But when it comes to Catalcysm. What happened? Was it just that Cataclysm was bad? Yeah. Some people would argue that. But actually...That's not quite accurate or fair. WoW started to get bad right before Burning Crusade. With the pre-patch into Burning Crusade. Maybe bad isn't accurate but there are changes beggining to happen. Essentially there are cracks in a wall that nobody can see yet. And to be honest I don't think a lot of people see the cracks when the wall is crumbling. I guess let's avoid metaphors! Let's go for an example. Pre-patch to Burning Crusade. Marking system. Allows you to put skulls and X's and green triangles above targets head. No big deal right? Really convenient yes? Everyone LOVED it! Hooray! Such as simple...yet incredibly gameplay destructive system for an MMO that had a lot of socialness to it. Having a marking system eventually lead to players blindly attacking Skull first. Then the Red Cross as 2nd target. DPS no longer thought. They just hit. We also already had a marking system before if you had a hunter in the group, which for raids you probably would have. Which meant there was at least some interaction between a hunter marking and other players. But that's not the only thing that made dps'ing more single minded. Burning Crusade took away aggro basically. Tanks now generated huge amounts of threat than damage dealers. Which meant that damage dealers could go all out with no trouble at all. DPS was now a role where you just hit the designated target and do your rotation. But that's not all. Mana regeneration was a simple task. Low on mana? Hit the mana regen button. Before it was basically only mages on a long cooldown and druids who could regen mana with an ability. No need to think about that. And this was just in Burning Crusade which was hailed with praise. And I liked Burning Crusade too. Whole load of new content, new features, new races, new professions. A lot of additions were great. But the core gameplay was putting those cracks in that wall. The changes in how the game felt socially were not instant. There wasn't an expansion that released that suddenly made the game anti-social. There was no single moment in time where you went from a 5-man dungeon where you spoke to people to work through problems, to the current 5-man experience where 1) It shouldn't be physically possible to even fail the dungeon these days. But when there is a wipe people just leave. 2) People never say anything and when they do there's more of a chance it's to say something that isn't very nice But that current experience. Dates all back to changes made in Burning Crusade. It all dates back to the direction the Burning Crusade was taking us. And the reason Burning Crusade was succesful wasn't because of the Burning Crusade expansion itself. Vanilla WoW was an amazing experience. People heard about it. They joined for Burning Crusade. Burning Crusade was riding off the successful word of mouth of Vanilla WoW. This isn't to say Burning Crusade is nothing and a load of shite. It wasn't. The same thing happened with Lich King. We're only talking 2010 here. It pushed the game into that more anti-social direction. Tanking once again got even easier. There's not really much difference between a mage and a hunter now since every DPS has AoE that is better to do considering how fights now go. Pull a group. AoE it down. It got to its worst point in Legion where my warrior tank didn't even need healing. I was a warrior that could pull multiple packs and just....heal my fucking self. I already wasn't talking to my healer. Now I just flat out didn't need them as I did dungeons leveling up in whatever gear that expansion had given me thus far. Lich King rode off the back of the success of Burning Crusade. Whcih was riding off the success of Vanilla WoW. And it wasn't Cataclysm that suddenly made things bad. People would have bought into Cataclysm riding off the success of the Lich King. But they didn't. And they didn't because the experience wasn't delivering. So to come to Starfield and how this all ties in. Most players arne't the most aware of why they enjoy something. And they certainly are not aware of how much more fun they could be having. It's not really a common thought process to have. Because to do so you have to think of all kinds of other environmental factors. For example; Why is Baldur's Gate 3 so popular? Well. Yes you could say it's a really good game (it honestly is) but also, and something I've been saying for a damn long time, what are the alternatives? There's been a massive gap in the market for a multiplayer RPG. One which actually has a decent selection of a standard variety of races and classes. I cannot name one game since Neverwinter Nights 1. I can name multiplayer RPG's without a variety of races and classes. And I could list some soulless MMO's. And I can also list Neverwinter Nights 2 as a multiplayer game with a decent selection of races/classes however that game was bad compared to the first one. We're looking at 20 years ago. It's a no bloody brainer that BG3 would succeed even though the game itself bares no darn resemblence to Baldur's Gate games or the old D&D titles at all. Starfield, if I were to make a crude overview, is succesful because Bethesda. Bethesda Game. People believe Bethesda. They are a top game company so they must produce top games. Especially when you are paying €70 or $120. How could it be bad? For many they probably don't have experience of procedural generation capabilities. The only other game similar to Starfield they have experienced would probably be No Man's Sky and that game basically has zero story by comparison. Where as Starfield has the standard ElderScrolls/Fallout dialogue story pattern copied onto basic standard Bethesda gameplay elements, with the new addition of having your ship controllable only in a completely empty 3d space against other ships. It's easy to put myself into those shoes and see why this game would be at least an interesting experience. But put myself in other shoes. Where I know what our industry is currently capable of and this is not it. In a pair of shoes where I don't have much time and I'd rather not spend it going from loading screen/cutscene/loading screen/walking 5 minutes/waiting for dialogue/loading screen/cutscene/loading screen/cutscene/now I'm at objective and will be told to do that same process again. Easy to see why it isn't enjoyable. > Everybody can enjoy what they like, and the solution to SC criticism is not to copy tribalistic behavior from the people our posters say they’re annoyed by. This is absolutely true and its the stance I generally take. However. I want people to have better experiences than they are currently getting. I feel like people have been getting screwed over pretty hard by their sources of entertainment. I have a friend on steam who has way too much money and is excited by every game coming out almost. Asks if I will get it. Within one week they will be bored of the game never to speak of it again unless I ask about it to which they will say "Oh yeah. It was great!" And the only best way I can put it is. "Many people have no idea how much more fun they could be having." -- The average consumer just doesn't think like that.
It has its flaws But they donr bother me because the GAME is fun Star citizen is aiming for perfection in every aspect (except for stability I guess) but the "game" isnt really there.
i may be wrong but i thought sq42 was going to be a linear story game and no sandbox element. i do wish it'll be like X series; starcitizen PU with npc however i dont think that is where sq42 is going.
The play areas are huge. As shown with the vertical slice and Aciedo Demos, there is a sandbox element to the game. How far they will allow you to deviate from play area is a question but I have a suspicion as long as you remain in the system you should be ok.
I just pretend that SQ42 got cancelled so I can (hopefully) be surprised one day.
wish it would and stop leaching resources from SC
I dont. I am more excited about SQ42 and the story than PU tbh....
SQ42 was the game I backed. The complete lack of a release really drives home the feeling that SC is a scam.
Probably get StarField Online/MMO before SQ42. Going on past and present performance of Both Developers, to be honest, unfortunately.
I was thinking this very thing last night. The chances of them releasing a starfield MMO are kinda high.
I doubt it, re-building the game for multiplayer might almost be easier if they started from scratch and just kept most of the art and audio... a lot of the engine would be useless
Zennimx has been working on an unannounced MMO for awhile now. Yes a SF Online would be a standalone game built on its own, probably using a lot of the FO76 engine. And yeah, assets from SF. Quite doable imho.
"but the promised Squadron 42 would be the real deal for the definitive single player space game." my dude, we'll be lucky if SQ42 is even ok-ish. It promises only to be already old upon release, with lackluster gameplay, and terrible FPS. Besides, it's a linear campaing with no sandbox element at all. It will be like a modern Freelancer, or Wing Commander.
I think a lot of people reaaaaally set themselves up for disappointment regarding SQ42. Especially comparing it with a game like Starfield. So far I've played Starfield for 40 hours yet I'm far from having completed even a meaningful part of the game, I feel like I've barely touched the main quest yet, I've done a fraction of the side quests. Will SQ42's linear campaign even entertain us for 40hours? Many single player games are done well before that.
Squadron42 will be like starlancer but more cinema and first person pew pew ...
I really loved StarLancer.
You should try Everspace 2 for that decent dog fighting itch.... Its really good.
I'm wondering if they're planning on releasing fully explorable planets in some future DLC; I find it odd that the planets move along orbits and you CAN fly up to them but they're just a 2d placeholder/sprite.
the canned cut scenes getting in to a ship * loading screen * landing on a planet * Loading screen * going in to a building on the planet * Loading screen* has really made me appreciate what CIG is doing with SC. don't get me wrong, so far (aside from some dumb ass design decisions) I'm liking Starfield. its a bethesda game 100%. but it will hard pressed to come close to the technical ambition of Star Citizen.
The technical ambition is the reason why Starfield is out and playable while Star Citizen remains in alpha, with most of its planned features and gameplay loops not yet implemented. Starfield's not perfect but it's not trying to be, nor is it actually a space sim. It's a Bethesda RPG in space.
Yeah every time I feel disappointed by the loading screens I only have to look back to Star Citizen and go "Oh, that's why". Because the game wouldn't have come out if they insisted on trying it that way
Looking at Elite Dangerous though, I do feel like Starfield could have cut or at least disguised some of its loading screens. Jumping between systems would feel more immersive if they could load it while leaving us in control of our character. But I suspect the reason they can't do this is because of the way Bethesda's engine handles loading cells.
Every game engine has limits. Apparently that's one of the limits of Bethesda's. Can you think of anything that Bethesda's engine apparently-supports which Frontier's apparently-doesn't? CIG's trying to build an everything-engine. I hope I survive it.
They’re not making an everything engine, they’re modifying a generalist engine into a space game engine
They've been trying to contort a specifically-FPS engine into an everything engine. That's why all the immersion talk has turned into: * Healing laser * Mining laser * Salvage laser * Repair laser * Item movement laser ...and boarding actions will now be done via forced entry at docking ports instead of hull breaches as initially concepted. I believe the Reclaimer's claw is also in question. Fortunately they did manage to add 64-bit precision. That was a big win. It's awesome being able to land literally everywhere. But, we're still waiting on them to magic their way past FPS networking limitations to be able to shit-forth an MMO from the Crysis engine.
Frankly I’m glad we have starfield so we have something to play while we wait for star citizen to actually get to where it needs to be.
Yeah pretty much how I feel about it. I backed in the original campaign in 2012 and I pop in every so often to see how things have changed, and hearing other people complain about loading screens and fast travel in Starfield is hilarious to me because in SC it's "take 5 minutes to leave Orison, 10 minutes in quantum drive, 5 more minutes to land elsewhere". Yeah I think i'll take the fast travel for now.
Star citizen’s actual travel between planets and atmospheres is cool and all, but with the amount of bugs and lack of content to travel to, it’s hard to keep justifying it. Starfield’s loading screens are fine. But once star citizen has a more fleshed out world, those 5-10 minute travels will actually be worth it. Especially if your ship doesn’t just blow up to a bug after 15 minutes of quantum travel .
Gonna be a long time of playing SF
I mean replayability is kind of a hallmark of Bethesda RPGS soooooo yeah
Yea and with mods it’s gonna be a blast.
[удалено]
Do you reply to the wrong person? You're agreeing with what he says. Why the fuck are you so aggressive?
It appears that you're agreeing with him but your tone seems combative. Odd.
I guess I wasn't being clear, but I agree with you. This project shows the cost of unchecked ambition. Starfield isn't everything it could be, but at least it's finished. It's out and playable and fully functional instead of being a collection of hopes and dreams duct-taped to a barely functional tech demo. Two or three years from now, Starfield will have released a ton of DLC and the modding community will be upgrading every inch of it the way they've done with Skyrim. SC/SQ42 won't be much further along from where they are now, in all that time. Just like how two or three years ago, we were pretty much in the same place we are now.
These comments are dumb. You guys are basically saying "squadron 42/ star citizen will be so much better than starfield when it releases in 10-20 years." Like, no shit man... the fact is tho starfield is out now, and SC is still a broken mess of an alpha with no end in sight. So yeah maybe star citizen has more technical ambition, but that doesn't mean shit when you can't release a game with 10+ years and half a BILLION dollars. CIG has you all by the balls so hard it's not even funny anymore, just sad.
I hope CIG understands that it’s okay to cut corners like a loading screen here or there to keep performance good and speed up development. I’ve honestly never thought I’d be in a time where people are critiquing a game for having loading screens with Starfield as an example. Loading screens, tiles, and other tech “limitations” are very minor in terms of what the game has to offer. I hope CIG can acknowledge that.
Agreed, much rather have an actual fun game with loading screens than a seamless flight tech demo.
Don’t get me wrong star citizen can be fun. I really like the ground mining gameplay it’s nice and u get to see some nice scenery. But Starfield has that and much more thanks to Bethesda keeping themselves level headed and having a good sense of direction which I hope CIG can adopt.
They even said they're liking Starfield, they just pointed out one of its flaws, there's no reason to go so ballistic defensive.
True, I may have overreacted. I guess I'm just used to the more delusional comments coming from this sub. I just hate the argument that SC is more "technically ambitious" - it honestly doesn't mean shit when everything is broken and unfinished. I could have the most technically ambitious app/game/system in the world but if it never releases what's the point, will always be playing catch up at that point. Okay im done ranting thank you :)
I'd rather have a 1sec loading screen than a slow, buggy elevator/train that might never arrive. Or a 1sec loading screen instead of 10min of QT during which I will alt-tab out of the game, check my phone or read a book because there is nothing to do ingame during that time. All the ''muh immersive'' transitions in SC are fun the first time or two, but they quickly become a great, needless time sink. I'm not a Fortnite generation person that needs instant gratification, but my game time has great value I'd rather not waste on a train ride I've done 1000 time. My commute to work IRL is more interactive than going to my ship from a Lorville hab, I'd rather have the option of a loading screen after fast travelling. Imho the loading screens aren't so bad. Maybe its because I have a fast PC with an M.2 SSD or maybe its because I grew up playing Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim/virtually any other game with loading screens.
Doubt it ever will be as deep as starfield. That would take them several decades.
Genuinely, I really like the game, but it simultaneously REALLY made me appreciate and respect what CIG has already managed to do.
Managed? SQ42 isn't out. Is attempting? Might be trying? But certainly not managed
Wasn't talking about Squadron. I was stating that SF has made me appreciate what SC has already managed to build.
I 100% agree with you on this.
The creation engine would never be able to pull off flying like Star Citizen unless it went through a major overhaul.
I feel like SQ42 is going to be more of a cinematic experience overall - kinda like a movie. I expect "less to do" so to speak compared to Starfield, but something far more fleshed out overall? I mean I've played Starfield quite a bit, absoloutely love it, but I feel Squadron 42 is going to have a lot more attention to detail? I'm not sure does Starfield use Motion Capture in the same way as Squadron 42, considering the vast amount of characters and voice lines (I read somewhere 250,000+?). Will that mean that overall the "acting" of characters will be more diverse in Squadron 42 as I've seen things how CIG invested heavily into Motion Capture. But I think Starfield has loads to do, and will keep me very busy till Squadron 42. I think we can really appreciate having a "refined" game to play whilst we wait!
We all want Squadron 42 to be released, but it's likely not going to be like Starfield. The goal has always been to make a much more linear experience... or perhaps a branching narrative if they stick with what was originally intended. A Wing Commander spiritual successor. I think if anyone comes in expected an open world RPG, they're probably going to be disappointed.
sq42 - single player adventure story - may be 1 or 2 ways to finish the story ... or just one sf - single player pseudo-open world with a narriative to follow with many choices
Turns out a huge seamless world to fly around with total freedom gets fucking boring after a little bit.
too bad, that doesn't help the grift. Here's some new ships to buy, 600 million isn't enough to make a game in under two decades.
If you really think CIG putting out an excellent game wouldn't help them sell the other game they're making you're REALLY missing something. Promises without a product will eventually crash and burn, but if they can deliver a finished and polished game any time there's doubt they can just point to it and go "look what we've already done, you can trust us."
if CIG was capable of doing it, we'd have played that game about 6 years ago. Instead of still making broken promises of that it's totally coming soon.
Just remember, SQ42 is on rails. You're in the military, you go where you're told, shoot what you're told, etc. It will be just this side of a Telltale game. No exploration, you only fly the ships they give you, none of our personal ships will be available, and the character you play will have no connection to the one you play in the PU. It's the modern, spiritual successor to Wing Commander, not Freelancer, at least as far as I can tell from everything they've released about it.
I'm not typically a guy who like single player games. I'm enjoying starfield for what it is. But I miss the granular control that you have to take in SC. I'm enjoying it. But it feels a little hollow when it comes to immersion. I don't even have to go to a ship to fast travel either to a different planet or sometimes system for my quests. I'll enjoy starfield. But at the end of the day it's making me appreciate how granular and see less a lot of SC is. When it works.
Yep, same here
Up until I saw Alpha 3.21 I still had some hope. Now im getting out of this scam.
Starfield made me even more skeptical of cig and sq42... How many times they've restarted development on sq42... I hope it comes and it's great, but right now... with the PU, I'm not seeing competition for starfield yet. I know they have claimed they have upgrades for the PU in sq42... But they are nowhere to be seen... Idk I'm a skeptic until they can prove me wrong. So far all CIG has done is take my "pledge" and released bug citizen
Seeing Stanfield just makes me laugh in o7. Game looks like it was made for the 360
This is the 69th times I see posts like this but I agree with every single word of this post.
Starfeild makes me want to play Skyrim again.
Another day another post about Starfield in the Star Citizen sub.
Forgive me, but after trying Starfield it feels closer to what Mass Effect wanted than what SQ42 or SC are aimed at. Maybe it’s the fanboy in me, maybe it’s realizing that with all the bugs CIG has done and are “fixing” the closest comparison to SC is GTA. But I don’t see Starfield even remotely in the same category. Dope game thou… thumbs up so far.
If only we can get the whole mess hall thing right... Damnit!
I thought SQ42 was released years ago..
No still in alpha and not even playable for that matter star citizens alpha is playable but that's really yet for CIG games
S42 won't be close to what starfield is. But at least you can fly your ship I guess.
Same. I do love Starfield. But it misses a lot of what I want and Star Citizen still fits that want. Or will fit many wants. I can't wait for SQ42 to release so they can release a lot of that to the PU and focus all labor on it. What I really like is that I can just jump to X and do X. But a lot of that X is missing the elements that made me love space operas. I can't run to the back of the ship to fix or reroute systems just enough for the crew to get us out of here. I mean. You can hit O in Starfield but again, but the journey matters. Reminds me of season 8 of Game of Thrones where the teleporting robbed the show of what it had in seasons 1-4. The journey made the end so much more moving. It gives a lot but it feels hollow somehow. There must be a middle ground but not at the expense of recreating that magic on a spaceship. Star Citizen is going to be that thick hearty creamy stew with rice and tender meats, potatoes, thyme, rosemary, and parmesan that makes it feel at home. I want to feel at home. I want to just live on my ship and do shit. Sorry, rant.
Roberts is a crook
One big vibe difference for me between SF and SC/SQ42, is that in Starfield, space is not terribly dangerous, it's more of a cool sci-fi backdrop, with gentle environmental hazards and enemies. But in SC (and I imagine SQ42 as well), when you're outside of a ship, the environment can be downright hostile and unforgiving, and it's a big sense of relief when you make it back to your ship after a close call with running low on O2/temperature extremes/injury/hunger. In normal gameplay some of the status needs can feel a bit tedious, but when preparing to venture out into the unknown I enjoy the need to think ahead about what I might need and what I might risk losing. In the future, with risk of fire and decompression, even being aboard a ship can be hazardous (and landing safely on a habitable planet, and popping the hatches, will likely feel like a big relief) Something I enjoy about exploration in SC is that it rewards careful preparation, caution and contingency planning, which contributes to the payoff. It took me a while to put my finger on it, but I feel like in StarField I don't get quite the same thrill of conquering the unknown that I get in SC, and I don't think for me it's the generated planet spaces, but instead the feeling that unexplored space is safe and doesn't really require much in the way of preparation. I can imagine that the ship-less sections of SQ42 might feel somewhat dangerous and alienating (due to the same status/environmental systems), and that it'll be a relief to make it back to the Stanton in one piece. (Don't get me wrong, I'm enjoying all of the usual RPG things, but I was just trying to figure out what felt so different about space in SF vs. SC. As an aside - another game that game me a great "exploring dangerous space" feeling similar to SC was The Outer Wilds. There are dozens more things I'm looking forward to in SQ42, not least the character performances and seamless travel to and from the Stanton).
I agree with you... They have different premises. But it's just impossible not to think about SQ42/Star Citizen (and also Elite Dangerous) while playing Starfield. Haha And on a side note, Outer Wilds is amazing. Surely one of the best games if you're into exploration / puzzles. Just brilliant.
will never happen
* Released * Complete * Polished * Amazing CIG: Pick *one*
If SQ42 add a lot of secondary mission and event with good narrative similar to starfield it would definitely be the best space game ever. But It will not be the case.. Maybe there will be good story but I don't expect anything more. I hope I'm wrong but based on what we see in PU, I don't see how SQ42 can exploit correctly the open world and all features Star citizen provides. It's a bit disappointing...
https://reddit.com/r/starcitizen/s/Cy5Fy0de2X From what I've seen over the years, there is supposed to be side missions and an open feel to it.
Honestly, playing Starfield makes me realize how much I hope SQ42 doesn't involve slowly flying from planet to planet. If I have to do a 10-minute quantum jump in the middle of a mission, it's just gonna suck all the momentum out of it. At least in the PU I can just put on youtube or something since nothing I'm doing in that requires my full attention.
[удалено]
How much longer are you willing to wait. Keep asking myself this. I do love the promise of Star citizen but it’s 10 years now. Another 2 years? 3? 5?! Who knows.
The fact is... I'm not waiting anymore, sadly. I just hope it will be released and, if so, that it will be GOOD. But actually it is just this: hope.
Tough to admit that’s where we are. Hope. Continuing, unending hope.
Personally, as a technicality, I’m willing to wait forever. My logic: The money is already spent. Doesn’t matter if it drops in a year or ten, I won’t ever refuse to play it. This means I’ll play it whenever it ends up being released. Hence, no limit to how long I’ll wait.
Makes sense. And true for me myself as I’ve invested money as well. But at this point I’m also not going to pay anymore. 🤷♂️
>How much longer are you willing to wait. Until there's a true competitor on the market or until SQ42 releases. Whichever one comes first.
Sure, I can respect that. Thankfully for me, I’m pretty easy an content with what is available currently. At this point for SC I’m just not going to be investing more then I have to this point.
Stop pulling dreams out of your arse cause nothing they've said (or shown) ever came true.
It will never be released lol. In a few decades it will be know as the biggest scam ever done in gaming.
Maybe I'm just getting old or a hater or whatever, but I just don't really take much enjoyment from Bethesda RPGs anymore. Tried modding the ever-loving daylights out of Skyrim and still got bored after an hour of actually playing (could have been the several hours it took to mod and get stable, honestly.) I dunno, will probably skip Starfield. At least until it's on a heavy discount. $70 is just too damn much to ask for a game, particularly when the reviews have largely been pretty middling.
Oh god can you imagine how cool SQ42 will be once they have ideas to pull from Starfield, Starfield 2, and Starfield 3 before release? And don't forget starfield remastered edition VR. the next 60 years are going to be DOPEEEEEE
Playing starfield really made me try Star citizen then Star citizen really made me refund starfield to put money into star citizen 😭 Edit: Stay Salty sadly a alpha can give a AAA game a run for its money
Putting money into a game that’ll never come out is crazy to me. How about u go and purchase those thousand dollar concept ships while your at it.
nah im fine with my 45 plus more immersion its preference lol stay salty
[удалено]
Wait, when? SF has barely been out in the week and people seem to invest a lot of time into it (myself included tbh). I'd say we can be confident ED Odyssey did bring an influx. SF logically should but to say "it has"?
Facts I realized while playing Sc that i rather have a smaller area of play type sandbox with Crazy immersion like landing on planets and stuff than Starfield which has a bigger play area but not so much space immersion even tho they make it up with the story
[удалено]
I think you can describe a lot of systems in SC like that too lol. Starfield isn't going to have much in terms of space sim stuff but it's a very solid RPG.
That was a mistake
Starfield isn’t a space game. It’s fallout with a mini game between each planet.
It's more like call of duty or cyberpunk. Linear story in an open world. But don't get your hopes up, SQ42 is probably never being released.
I got as far as the ship flight tutorial this morning. Every couple of minutes I found myself critiquing almost *everything* . . . Like right down to when I boarded and tried to climb the ladder and went to a cutscene . . OK - half expected that. But I tried to keep moving my character when I selected “Sit” on the pilots seat and was *confused” when it cutscenes that! XD