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
Hand held up ! Never heard that term whale = big licks money squanderer. But I was smart enough to guess what it meant before I searched for definition. So 2 to you, 1 to me lol
 
william dempsey said:
Hand held up ! Never heard that term whale = big licks money squanderer. But I was smart enough to guess what it meant before I searched for definition. So 2 to you, 1 to me lol
Click to expand...
It comes from casinos; meaning their big-money clientele; the ones they'll comp a suite and amenities to, because they will possibly spend a small fortune during their stay.
 
I learned whale as a slang term from MMOs, which is what people call the people that spend tons of money on the game.
 
Norzan said:
I learned whale as a slang term from MMOs, which is what people call the people that spend tons of money on the game.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's a thing!

"They're trying to catch that whale."

Something along those lines, I've seen people use it in such discussions in regards to MMOs.
 
Whales are used when talking about games like Marvel Snap too. Might as well call them Dorks.
 
I still love how after being called them out for the 'shotgun' firing square-shaped rifle shells through a round barrel, they made the weapon 'caseless'. Except it still ejects cases in third person.
 
Mr Fish said:
wait.... really?
Click to expand...
Yep, after their initial trailer proved what we all already knew (Bethesda couldn't design a firearm to save their lives), they STILL fucked up their 'fix' because the retards there forgot about the second camera mode the game offers.
 
Had to look up Starfield's Metacritic score because I knew it would be something ridiculous
83 (77% positive and 1% negative reviews) :golfclap:
I mean yeah we all know what "gaming journalism" is like, but at this rate it's just a matter of time before they have to start assigning scores higher than 100 to good games
 
I had called it out as soon as I saw the Todd Howard interview on Lex Friedman, and here we have an article confirming the even larger extent to which it was true:

https://www.pcgamer.com/starfield-d...its-files-we-had-a-washed-version-of-the-game

During development they had a few ideas for mechanics that would have made this game slightly more interesting, which no doubt originated from some slightly more competent designers that were below the directors, but it all got shot down by Todd and Emil because if a game isn't dumbed down and simplified to shit they don't think it is "fun".
 
Watched a review recently that went in-depth into all the shit they removed from the game.

There's a portion in the video that shows an interview Todd where he talks about having stuff like needing space suits for specific planets, health conditions that you needed to treat or else you would get major penalties. But apparently after a while Todd and his buddies thought it was not "fun" and decided to basically gut the entire thing and leave a little bit of it for "flavor". At that point he should have just turned to camera and say "yeah, we make games for idiots". Fuel was also gonna be a thing (mentioned in a post above), but that also cut because Todd thought it was not "fun".

Can i say how fucking condescending it is to assume what people will find fun? Yeah, you might not find it fun, but many others might find it fun. You are selling a product, not making a game for yourself.
 
Last edited:
Bethesda makes games tailored specifically for dads who come home from a long day of work and need something to play for an hour before they crash on the couch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top