But the only thing I hate about Starfield is just the way the game always talks about how amazing exploration of the unknown is (heck, your main character is even a part of the explorer group name Constellation) while trying everything it can to stop player to do just that (overly rely on teleportation, cannot travel seamlessly between planets, etc...)

It feels like you are playing an institute scientist in an fallout game, always stay in your high tech base and only travel using teleportation to the outside world

This is a major turn off for me and there is no way to fix it

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago (2 children)

100%. The best part of Bethesda open world games is exploring the open space between towns, quests, objectives, etc. Fast travel is an option, but rarely necessary. If you rely on it you will miss lots of cool stuff.

Not so in Starfield, the space between objectives is literally empty space.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

That's a fair opinion to have, but my preference is actually exploring the towns. I love that Starfield removed many of the middle of nowhere winding dungeons that I got so bored of. (Dwemer/Nord ruins in Skyrim and office buildings/other skyscrapers in fallout 4.)

[–] z00s@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I mean, that's why it's called "space", right? That's literally what it is.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 18 points 11 months ago (2 children)

And space travel isnt actually a fun adventure, but the point of a video game is to romanticize the concepts. Not make them as boring and realistic as possible

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 7 points 11 months ago

There's lots of actual stuff in interplanetary space that you can pull on for inspiration on how to make an interesting game.

You can have counters with shady trader types that are only in the vast gulf between the systems, there could be rogue planets with billion year old abandoned cities to explore filled with automated defences for you to fight and interesting loot at the end. Distant ancient asteroids that contain the seeds of the first life in the universe that when you interact with temporarily give you status change that you can only get from asteroids and temporarily gives you super strength or something, allowing you to complete missions in a way you otherwise would not necessarily have done.

The way these kind of side quests are supposed to work is the player is plodding along trying to get from point A to point B and on the way they get sidetracked by this side quest (the clue is in the name Bethesda). Maybe it changes their priorities or how they're going to tackle and upcoming mission. Side quests are not supposed to be independent standalone things, they're supposed to integrate with the main story. They're not supposed to be something you find easily there's supposed to be something you come across on your own as you're exploring the environment, but you can only do that if the developers bothered to provided environment for you to explore. If they just teleport you to your destination then there's no opportunity for this kind of emergent gameplay.

Loads of stuff you can put between the star systems.

[–] Pwnmode@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I agree. Unless that's the whole point of the game you are making, and then it's just the nature of the game. Flight Sim is one of my friend's favorite games, but not so for me. At least they aren't telling people that they are wrong about it being boring because it's realistic and realism is better or some crap.

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 11 months ago

There is, in fact, a very heated debate on whether or not simulators that stay true to form are actually games. With the argument being, they are either toys or simulators.

"I had fun playing with it" isnt exclusive to games, as a ball is not a game but I would gladly throw it against a wall for hours by myself with some music.

But lots of people would likely shit on an attempt to rebrand those things as "video toys" when the distinction is largely only relevant to people studying design, so the heated debate is mostly between academics and pedants.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

yes. the point is it doesn't work well in a video game.

[–] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

Yeah it's quite an accomplishment to make the vastness of space feel claustrophobic and small.

Some of the response to the reviews is bizarre - one seems to try to claim that the planets are not boring because they're realistic and the real world is boring, and that the player is probably just overwhelmed by the awesomeness of it all.

It almost feels like the game Devs have convinced themselves that they've been working on the greatest game ever made and when told "no you haven't" they're responding by saying "you just don't get our vision".

It's an ok game. I'm actually less bothered by the loading screens and more by the old fashioned story telling. This game would have been amazing if released closer after Skyrim. But it's been 12 years and we've had Witcher 3, Cyberpunk and Baldurs Gate 3 that have changed expectations. All of them are better at evoking a sense of emotional engagement with the game, and actions having meaningful consequences in the plot. Subplots like the bloody baron in Witcher 3, or Judy in cyberpunk have stuck with me in a way characters and events in Skyrim and now Starfield just never have.

Problem is I suspect Bethesda will focus on all the loading screen / sense of scale complaints and not register the more important (imo) issues with the stories, characters and gameplay. Less but better is the real lesson I think.

[–] MeanEYE@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Funny thing is, they don't care. As long as they have fans who will complain but still buy their product at full price... they simply don't care. This is evident with every product of theirs. Fallout76 had bugs originating from FO4 that were patched by community but were reintroduced in FO76.

[–] Aux@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

I'm actually fine with personally, but what I dislike is that Starfield is too grindy and slow.