Starfield

Are you going to be a Bethesdafag?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 4 6.9%

  • No.

    Votes: 35 60.3%

  • I am a hypocrite.

    Votes: 12 20.7%

  • I like to whine a lot about things I am the reason for sucking.

    Votes: 7 12.1%
  • Total voters
    58
Guys @ironmask @PaxVenire personally I wouldn't even trust certain independent reviewers anymore, because ever since I saw certain people selling out/shilling for Cyberpunk 2077 before its official release, by giving it good scores & reviews. That was I when realized if they did that then, they'll certainly be doing the same thing now! I think that's what's going on here with these Starfield reviews, again a bit too early to say, but I'm still skeptical about these reviews, and taking them with a grain of salt.
 
The ones who got early review codes reviewing a game favorably so that they will get more review codes in the future are to be trusted on a game being good? Nope. I mean, Skyrim's a total piece of shit even at the time of release and look at how highly rated that game is. I wouldn't trust critic reviews that just gush about how good something is cause then something is amiss. But there are reviews that are a bit more mixed, leaning positively. I'll hear them out but I won't trust them fully either.
 
Why do all the weapons remind me of people shooting staplers at each other?
the-simpsons.gif

Nothing(shown) has any OOMPH to it. they are just nailguns.
 
ironmask said:
So far it seems like most game journalist and youtube reviewers are loving StarField. Does that mean it's good. Maybe. I doubt it.
Click to expand...

How much of a pessimist I am I know I should always leave open the possibility that something is good or turns out well, how much the odds are stacked against this. But we live in a time in which positive feedback can be bought in many ways. It does not even require money, often being a form of legalized extortion (You do not like our game? Well it could be when we have news again about a new project or we are releasing a new game that we 'could' forget telling you about it). It is both the desire for exclusives but also the concern of being left out in the future that makes journalists submit, though I also think we are seeing a generation of journalists whose 'game values' don't equal that of what I think used to be the majority of gamers, easily being impressed by the 'bright light and the loud noises' and these game mechanics that are designed to put you in a power fantasy mode.

I base my expectations on the previous Bethesda games I have played and all the promises and claims they have made over the years and my magic 8-ball says "Don't bet on it.". I am confident that when you strip away all the hype and compare it to your experiences with any sort of open world game that this will be a very middling experience.
 
TheKingofVault14 said:
Guys @ironmask @PaxVenire personally I wouldn't even trust certain independent reviewers anymore, because ever since I saw certain people selling out/shilling for Cyberpunk 2077 before its official release, by giving it good scores & reviews. That was I when realized if they did that then, they'll certainly be doing the same thing now! I think that's what's going on here with these Starfield reviews, again a bit too early to say, but I'm still skeptical about these reviews, and taking them with a grain of salt.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's what yongyea did with Cp2077 before it released. I think he got a review copy and was talking about how cyberpunk was a masterpiece. Then it actually came out and that wasn't the case. Lost a lot of respect for him after that.
 
I find 7 a fair rating for what this game probably is. It is not a technological achievement and I don't think the content holds up compared to much better written games. To be honest, I don't think that its fans should make an issue about this in the future. Why should they be concerned if the writing or the gameplay doesn't get an award unless there is a certain doubt in their minds about the quality they feel can only be taken away by these getting some 'official' positive acknowledgement.
 
Hmm. 5 is average, popcorn game.
6 is good.
7 is great.
8 is fantastic
9 is amazing
10 is literally perfect.

And honestly, I don't think most games, especially AAA stuff, are great, most of them seem to be good bordering on great.

In the industry a 7 is basically a 5 at this point.

[edit]

By the way, lots of 10's for Starfield btw.
 
Yeah people's understanding of ratings has become really messed up. Lower than an 8.5 and the game is basically 'dead on release' for a lot of gamers these days.
A rating of 7 is honestly not bad. That does not mean that a game does not have some good points that make it worth checking out at least once or when it is on discount.

The 10 ratings. I have stopped believing in the honesty of those.
 
Glad I gave Starfield a pass for now; its warranted far too much hype. People believed this would be a revolutionary game, where you could freely explore the confines of space, but the exact same bullshit was funelled to us by Hello Games in 2016 and there was no way in hell I was going to fall for the same bullshit twice.

It's funny that when I bring up this argument, people tell me "yeah but its Bethesda" as if that's supposed to be a good thing.
 
Yeah at least on Steam the + ratings that just go "ver good" is kept in balance by the - ratings who go "poop".
Same with user reviews of 10 and 0 on metacritic who reviewbomb positively or negatively.
On the critic side of things there is nothing to keep 10'ers balanced nor any way to keep them accountable either.

Personally I don't care about critic reviews or the final metacritic score all that much. But what bothers me is that people in the industry do.
 
ExcelUp said:
Glad I gave Starfield a pass for now; its warranted far too much hype. People believed this would be a revolutionary game, where you could freely explore the confines of space, but the exact same bullshit was funelled to us by Hello Games in 2016 and there was no way in hell I was going to fall for the same bullshit twice.

It's funny that when I bring up this argument, people tell me "yeah but its Bethesda" as if that's supposed to be a good thing.
Click to expand...
Apparently it has fixed landing zones on all planets and in most of them when you land there is one point of interest (a dungeon) and then basically nothing else. There's nothing revolutionary about that. It's basically the worst of both worlds as those who want to explore planets can't and those who want Bethesda's dungeon themeparks don't get that either.
 
Mr Fish said:
Apparently it has fixed landing zones on all planets and in most of them when you land there is one point of interest (a dungeon) and then basically nothing else. There's nothing revolutionary about that. It's basically the worst of both worlds as those who want to explore planets can't and those who want Bethesda's dungeon themeparks don't get that either.
Click to expand...

To be frank, I was put off when I heard that 90% of the planets had no life on them. Spent far too much time on No Man's Sky exploring a desolate walking simulator, mining the odd rock only to hear "LIFE SUPPORT POWER LOW" every five minutes, which required me to feed the rocks I just mined into my suit so I wouldn't die of space aids.

Never again.
 
The Dutch Ghost said:
That is not even an argument. And this was this type of reasoning was used on many decisions or opinions we would be in a world of trouble.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately its the opinions of shills and game journalists who don't have a clue what they're doing, and in 2023 that's the only opinion that matters in the industry. *sigh*
 
ExcelUp said:
To be frank, I was put off when I heard that 90% of the planets had no life on them. Spent far too much time on No Man's Sky exploring a desolate walking simulator, mining the odd rock only to hear "LIFE SUPPORT POWER LOW" every five minutes, which required me to feed the rocks I just mined into my suit so I wouldn't die of space aids.

Never again.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a really annoying game experience. I am glad I passed on it after I was initially very curious about this game when I saw the first trailer years ago. Freedom is nice in a game but if that is all it offers with actually parts of interest being rare and I become bored with the experience.

Eumesmopo said:
THE STORY IS WORSE THAN IN SKYRIM AND OBLIVION

ykTnyYq.png


AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Click to expand...

And the stories of Oblivion and Skyrim were nothing to write about.

Eumesmopo said:
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

HdWDRAR.png
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is not selling this game experience to me. Pass.
 
Eumesmopo said:
THE STORY IS WORSE THAN IN SKYRIM AND OBLIVION

ykTnyYq.png


AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Click to expand...
Skyrim's is basically just a series of tropes they strung together, I doubt it'll be as bad as 'that'. :O
I've actually read reviews complementing the story stating that they finally got it right. :thinking:

Eumesmopo said:
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

HdWDRAR.png
Click to expand...

Oh you made a second post. oops!
So radiant dungeons makes a return huh? Gag.

[edit]

And I keep hearing that the game "doesn't REALLY start" until you finish the main quest, so better hop on those artifact hunts!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top