• Art35ian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    10 months ago

    I love Starfield. My mates love Starfield. It’s Fallout meets No Man’s Sky meets Mass Effect.

    It’s just another kick ass Bethesda game in a long list of kick ass Bethesda games IMO.

    • ShadowRam@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      85
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      its a solid B

      75/100

      It’s good.

      It’s not earth shattering, its not game of the year.

      It scratches that Skyrim RPG itch but in space.

      It’s less buggy and less crashy than people were expecting.

      It’s not without its flaws.

      It’s a solid B

      • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        This might be the most concise and accurate review I’ve seen. Nothing long winded, no excuses, no fanboyism, being fair and holding it up as it is.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          That wasn’t a review, it was a bunch of statements stringed together. At most it could be the conclusion of a review.

          A review needs to offer some explanations about what’s good (or bad) and why.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Personally I’d give it like a C or maybe B- at the top. It’s fine, but there are so many missing basic quality of life features that should be there.

        My biggest gripes are all focused on outposts though. Outposts seemed to be one of the focuses from the marketing material, but they’re a pain in the ass to actually use. There’s somehow no list of the outposts you have, let alone a way to view what they’re producing. Outposts need to be linked together, but there’s no way to sort or auto-delete items, so it all eventually will get clogged up with lead, or whatever other resource doesn’t get used often. You’ll have to manually go through your containers to remove the clog and just dump it on the ground, where it’ll remain for the rest of your playthrough. There’s no snapping for anything except storage containers and the habitation modules. Everything else has to be placed by hand with manual rotations, so nothing is ever lined up. The alignment will also change after you place an object, so literally nothing will ever be aligned.

        I have issues with many other parts of the game too, but outposts seem so incomplete, and somehow generally worse than what we had in FO4. Yet, outposts were prominent in their marketing. How?

    • hyperhopper@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s another subpar Bethesda game in a long line of subpar Bethesda games. Lifeless bland NPCs, tons of glitches, bad gameplay issues, and the same “shallow ocean” criticisms we’ve been going over since Skyrim.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s clear to me that Bethesda thinks Skyrim was peak Elder Scrolls, when I think Morrowind was peak Elder Scrolls. Unfortunately, it seems too much to ask for a decent story and interesting side content.

        So I just don’t buy Bethesda games anymore. I was disappointed in Skyrim, and Fallout 4 wasn’t really my thing. It also doesn’t help that I don’t like the leveling mechanics of RPGs either and tend to prefer ARPGs like Ys and Zelda where leveling isn’t a major part of the game loop. I know what Bethesda offers, and it’s just not what I’m looking for these days. I play RPGs for story and immersion, not for graphics, character builds, and mods, and Bethesda seems to be more interested in the latter than the former.

        But that’s what I appreciate from Bethesda. They’re pretty consistent at delivering a certain experience, it just so happens that it’s not for me.

    • Poggervania@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      Bruh, Bethesda arguably peaked like 20 years ago with Morrowind. Everything else since has been more or less downhill lol.

          • Dee@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you filthy Imperial? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in House Telvanni, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Black Marsh, and I have over 300 confirmed farm equipment kills. I am trained in Dunmer warfare and I’m the top battlemage in the entire Vvardenfell armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision spells the likes of which has never been seen before in this realm, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across Cyrodiil and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the ash storm, scrib. The ash storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with conjuration. Not only am I extensively trained in alchemical combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the Sixth House and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn N’wah. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

            Brought to you by the Great House Telvanni.

      • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        My guilty pleasure is to install Morrowind again and commit to replaying it, but to instead do another Skyrim playthrough because I just have more fun for some reason.

        There’s something about the newer Bethesda games. I’ll go and install legacy games from other companies all the time for the sense of nostalgia, but despite having beaten almost all of them going back to Arena, if I want a Bethesda game I always end up playing Skyrim or FO4. And now (I presume) Starfield

      • thanevim@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        They were certainly Bethesda games. I’m not even remotely fond of multiplayer fallout. But for 4, it’s a marvelous modding world that I’ve sunk over a thousand hours into.

        • Norgur@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          And thanks to their cultish adherence to their engine, I could copy paste some mods between Skyrim and Fallout.

      • BruceTwarzen@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        This is the moat insane thing i have ever heard. Or it’s some sort of burn because how shit they are.

        • all-knight-party@kbin.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          I’ve never played 76, but 4 is one of my favorite games of all time. I think most people who didn’t like it were going into it desiring for it to be something it wasn’t. What it was impeccably good at was being a scavenging looter shooter with addicting weapon and armor modification and a fun outpost building system that wasn’t for me, but did let me make my own little home.

            • all-knight-party@kbin.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              10 months ago

              Definitely not Bethesda’s strong suit and not what I go to their games for. Their NPC interaction is made up of tons of awkward TMI introductions and dialogue too quirky to take seriously most of the time. That’s a valid criticism, I would not say Fallout 4 is well written. I think it has some interesting premises like the whole synth idea, but not a well executed story.

              The only overall story I really thought was good in that game was Paladin Danse’s quest chain.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            This. I completely agree. Fallout 4 is a great looter shooter. If you take it light and breezy you’re going to have fun.

            It is not an RPG where your actions have impact on the world.

            • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Honestly, the same is sorta true with most Bethesda game going back. Short of the atomic bomb in FO3, it’s just minor dialog changes most of the time.

              I don’t get the FO4 hate from the FO3/FO-NV fans. They’re all three equivalently immersive.

      • Art35ian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        10 months ago

        Bethesda made way more games than that. Are you new to gaming? You should check out their website.

        • Silverseren@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          But those are their most recent offerings. I care more about the quality of what they produce now and not their glory days decades ago.

          • Art35ian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oh, so you ARE aware of their other games and you were just cherry picking the ones that weren’t as popular? Now with that brought to light, you’re changing the date parameters to suit your narrative?

            You’re very good at this.

            • Silverseren@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              All I “cherry picked” was their two most recent games that have actually been published in the past decade.

              • hypelightfly@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                Technically Skyrim has also been published in the past decade, and even more recently than Fallout 4. In fact it’s been released 5 times since Fallout 4.

      • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Anything is better than No Man Sky, after a trillion updates they still haven’t fixed the one issue the game has. There is only a single planet but a million copies of it with different colors.

        • KidsTryThisAtHome@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          From what I’ve seen that’s also starfield lol, the same desert planets copy/pasted with different colored smoke/sand

          • hubobes@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Yes but planets like that are realistically quite common. The ones with special features and biomes however are few but quite well done. Really not comparable.

        • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          And de-synch issues and lack of flight stick support (regardless of steam, who cares about that). Also repetitive missions.

  • Mandy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ou for fucks sake people, games dont have to be perfect tens Its okay to be a 8/10 or 7/10

    • nanoUFO@sh.itjust.worksOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      The funny thing is that “Publisher Bethesda was not permitted to pay additional royalties for the RPG because it scored 84 on Metacritic, according to Fallout New Vegas developer Chris Avellone. It appears that Obsidian’s publishing contract included a deal that meant the studio would be issued bonuses if the game hit a Metacritic of 85.” scores matter to Bethesda a lot even enough to ruin relationships and screw developers.

      • Mandy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        i know that one, and my comment was 100% not about that none, really just about people really

          • Mandy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oh nooooooo, a random nobody on the internet doesnt like how I write in my second language, whatever shall I do? Is that good enough for you sire? May I get your highly esteemed stamp of approval now?

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Guess we should switch to a different language then, the first language of OP.

            Or are you then going to cry as well since you only mastered English?

  • Archmage Azor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think Bethesda knows how to make one game in different settings, sadly that game was most popular in the early 10s.

    • Eochaid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      What a wierd take, given that people STILL play Skyrim, Morrowind, and Fallout games in droves to this day. And that there are a ton of YouTubers that have made careers exclusively off of Beth lore and build videos and such.

      Also given the post is about the game shifting to “mostly positive” on Steam. Which means the vast majority of reviews on steam are actually positive. And a lot of the negative reviews have to do with performance and technical issues, not the gameplay itself.

      Also the fact that other “open world story-based shooters with rpg and crafting mechanics” are actually really popular - you know like Cyberpunk, or Mass Effect, or RDR2, or arguably, Jedi Survivor.

      If you don’t like Beth games, that’s fine. They’re not for everyone. But it doesn’t mean your opinion is universal.

    • hypelightfly@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I think this is an accurate way to put it. I happen to like that game but if it’s not what you were expecting or you’re tired of it you’re not going to like the game.

      I have to say the best change from FO4 is ditching the voiced protagonist. That was a big mistake at the time.

  • dmrzl@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    10 months ago

    Is the score of Starfield really the only gaming topic Lemmy has to offer since like 4 days?

    • doctorcrimson@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Some of it is organic hype and some of it is Corporate Funded social media teams / personnel who do their best to control the online narrative. Happens every time a Triple A game launches, no matter how many times that Company has betrayed it’s audience and succumbed to greedy scummy practices. People even still talk about Activision Blizzard titles as if it won’t just be another cashgrab.

      Personally, I’m always super skeptical about these sort of games having a positive reception. I think the fast decline in user scores since launch is a perfect example of how unreliable the hype is.

    • NickNak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      There’s a giant push to really hate on Starfield, all over the internet

      • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Yeah, and I don’t get why. We quite literally got exactly what we expected with Starfield, and nobody said we would get anything different. For those of us who enjoy it, we got precisely what we were promised. For those who don’t enjoy it, nobody tried to pretend they were getting something different.

        If I have one complaint, they did not manage to brand it as effectively as they branded Fallout (the blonde cartoon, music, etc). But then, they never managed to brand tES that way and we’re all still alive.

        My 2c. Isn’t it a breath of fresh air that we got a complete game without $100s in day1 DLC required to make it playable?

        • NickNak@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I remember people hating on Skyrim when it came out, then Fallout 4, surprisingly not Fallout 76, you are right they never lied about it or promised stuff we didn’t get, I don’t really have interest in the game so I haven’t been following it to much but I don’t recall there being any classic Toddisms either

          Starfield is as Generic Bethesda as it gets(which is a good thing) they didn’t introduce shit from other AAA games, like you said, no annoying Battle pass, day one DLC etc and other than early access, was there preorder bonuses?

          The hate just seems odd, I can get the hate for most AAA shit but it seems really misplaced for StarField

          You’re right about the branding, nothing to me sticks out for the series’s brand, maybe they didnt want another vault boy esq thing, so the game could stand alone, I dont know

          Also, I guess also the cutscenese/animations everywhere, launching ships, docking, landing can get annoying, I understand the complaints about those

          • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            like you said, no annoying Battle pass, day one DLC etc and other than early access, was there preorder bonuses?

            There were some minor cosmetic day 1 bonuses that nobody is losing sleep over not having. Basically, a skin pack for 4 items you get early on in the game’s main story. Unless people are roleplaying heavy, those items are in storage or sold to vendors by the 5 hour mark in the game. I’ve seen some people who wanted pay-to-win or pay-to-pretty bitch because this was miles from it.

            The hate just seems odd, I can get the hate for most AAA shit but it seems really misplaced for StarField

            Exactly. Bethesda games have never been the bleeding edge for graphics, even when they were the games crushing GPUs (Balmorra@6fps, I’ll never forget you). Nobody is even meaningfully saying that the money was spent on bonuses or moon vacations for the execs or anything, only that what they spent it on was not hyper-realistic graphics. They’ve always been a vast game. That’s where they spend their dev money.

            Also, I guess also the cutscenese/animations everywhere, launching ships, docking, landing can get annoying, I understand the complaints about those

            Everything is fast travel and loading screens. You’re right. This has been the complaint about every Bethesda game since day 1. I remember loading screens in Daggerfall. Yes, games with different focus and different engines have mastered seamless landing and takeoff. Yes, I’m sure Bethesda could have added that, or faked it. But they made clear a year ago we’d be seeing load screens for those things, so nobody should’ve expected otherwise.

            • NickNak@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Everything is fast travel and loading screens. You’re right. This has been the complaint about every Bethesda game since day 1. I remember loading screens in Daggerfall. Yes, games with different focus and different engines have mastered seamless landing and takeoff. Yes, I’m sure Bethesda could have added that, or faked it. But they made clear a year ago we’d be seeing load screens for those things, so nobody should’ve expected otherwise.

              Sorry, I’m not talking load screens, as, well, that’s a thing you can’t avoid and it’s silly to want that, what I mean is when you dock a ship, when you land a ship, when you furniture or something, those animations, like fallout 4, there’s mods that skip these animations, they’re cool like once or twice but it’s silly that they happen all the time, just take us to a load screen as soon as we press the button :(

              • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                Ahh. But don’t those animations mask loading processing so you see fewer “spinning wheel” screens? I remember early Skyrim having minute long waits when you entered a door

                • NickNak@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  I’m not sure, but I feel like they don’t? I’m more happy with just a load screen than one animation followed by a load screen

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Probably a big part of the hate comes from Playstationers, who cry about exclusives now that they are on the short end.

        • pory@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          You did have to pay $100 to play this one on day 1. The plebs that bought the $70 version had to wait a week.

          • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            This pleb waited a few days and pays $10/mo for a bunch of games, including Starfield. I’m happy enough.

  • woelkchen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    10 months ago

    I don’t understand the people who spend a hundred hours on a game to then give it a bad rating, calling it boring. Why don’t they just quit much earlier and play Chrono Trigger or something?

    • lustyargonian@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Plays game for 2 hours, rates poorly

      “How can they review it without completing it”

      Plays game for 60 hours, rates poorly

      “Why are they rating it poorly if they spent so many hours on it?”

      • cdipierr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s such a bizarre, but real issue. I’ve always been boggled by the idea that you can’t offer your opinion on some games without first giving them a full work week. “I know you just sat there for the length of 5 movies and didn’t like it, but it doesn’t really get good until you sit through another 10.”

        If you give it 2 hours, a game should have made it worth your time.

      • grill@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        2 hours is more than enough for general impression IMO. Just imagine watching a 2 hour movie that is boring AF. I can’t judge them for quiting.

        • Kaldo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          2 hours doesn’t let you experience even 10% of what a game like this usually offer, less alone giving you time to tinker with the systems and see if they actually work, and furthermore if they are actually fun once you’re good at them.

          • grill@thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Of course I agree. But it’s still not that great game design, if you are bored for hours. It’s like people telling me about tv show that gets good after first season. What should I do until then… :)

            • Kaldo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              How else do you explain to someone what dwarf fortress is, for example? You need dozens of hours just to get the grasp of mechanics and UI, less alone to figure out whether you even like the game. Same goes for many bigger games, for example mount and blade (bannerlord) starts off strong with a promise of you establishing and leading a kingdom but once you actually reach that part through tedious grind, you realize it was all for nothing and the game’s a badly designed, shallow, unfinished sandbox with absolutely no vision or execution in that regard. Good luck getting to that conclusion without already investing at least 50 mediocre hours in it though.

              • 0xc0ba17@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                You need dozens of hours just to get the grasp of mechanics and UI, less alone to figure out whether you even like the game

                The problem with this thinking is that you split the game in 2 parts: first a tedious learning process of dozens of hours, and then an enjoyable experience once you know how to play, and imply that you need to get over the first part before being able (or allowed) to rate the game. But the learning part is the game, even more so if you need to invest dozens of hours.

                Many players will simply enjoy the grind of Mount and Blade, because they don’t care about the endgame. Many players (maybe the same) will uninstall Dwarf Fortress after half an hour, because they will estimate that the learning curve isn’t worth their time, even if it was the greatest game ever.

              • grill@thelemmy.club
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                I understand your point. But, if I take your example of mount and blade. If it’s starts off strong with 50 hours of fun, that’s a win in my book. But yes, in this regard steam ratings fail, because of binary recommend or not recommend voting. On the other hand, you can see how many hours did the user that posted a review played, so you can kinda make your own decision.

                Also, I would like to add that games like dwarf fortress, rimworld, factorio and similar, all start of fun, if you’re into this genre….at least for me, they did. Thinking back, I think I never experienced playing a game for X hours having a horrible time, and somewhere in the middle changing my mind. At least from the gameplay standpoint. Maybe sometimes story had some unexpected bump in quality (thank god), but not really core gameplay.

                Overall, I agree with you, 2 hours is too little for a complete review of a video game. But these are user reviews that can be helpful as well. For an example, for someone who hasn’t that much time to invest in a game to get to the good part. Professional reviewers (or people who have themselves as professional) should play the game for a suitable amount of time, before making an informed review.

          • hypelightfly@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            If I game can’t keep you engaged while doing that for the first 2 hours it’s not a good game, at least for that person. You don’t need to know everything the game has to offer if it’s bored you for 2 hours.

        • lustyargonian@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I think there are too many exceptions to this that the best way to truly know is to play it for yourself. I hated Death Stranding, Control, Days Gone, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Fallout 3 and many other games in their initial few hours, but as they opened up they quickly became my one of my favourites. I’ve started my first playthrough of Witcher 3 and in the first 3 hours I’m not yet impressed, but I’ll give it a good chance before dropping it. Not sure if Starfield is any good but given its systems, it’ll probably need some buildup time I guess.

    • rubicon88@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      10 months ago

      With some games after 20+ hours the honeymoon phase is over. But I want to finish it so that all this time doesn’t feel wasted. And there’s hope that the game will get better. I mean everybody else loves it so it must be a great game right?

      However, often it just feels like work and it makes the flaws of the game even more obvious. And I just end up despising it.

      • burgundymyr@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        This is the best answer, players are invested after a certain point, but the realization that they don’t like the game comes later in the process. The more you play the game you don’t like the more you’re frustrated with it and the more likely you are to give it a poor rating, especially when the things that are your biggest complaints feel like obvious bug fixes that should have already happened, but continue to exist.

    • 9point6@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      The world would be a better place if more people just played Chrono Trigger when they got upset at a game.

      Honestly moba fans alone would make it the best selling game of all time

    • DrQuint@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      If a narrative-heavy game takes 60 hours and then fucks it up on the third act, it deserves the hate. Games having a bad payoff 200% warrants bad reviews.

      Oh sorry, this isn’t a Danganronpa thread.

      • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        Wait you think danganronpa fucks up it’s third act? I was absolutely hooked from start to finish for danganronpa 1 and 2. Not yet had the time to play 3 properly yet though but I’ve looked what I’ve played so far.

        • Scratch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          That is a great question! I’ve certainly asked myself the same thing and the only answer I can come up with in 2 parts.

          1: The game is compulsive. While you are playing you want to keep playing. And while the moment to moment interactions are dull (imo) but not so dull as to drive me away. There may be plenty of Oblivion nostalgia keeping me playing.

          2: Many of the games problems appear in retrospect. The dumbing down of the subsystems, for example. Much like Outer Worlds; it feels fine while you’re in there but once you stop and step back you realise how crappy they are.

          That’s all I got for now.

    • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      You can put a ton of hours into a game and not like it. This isn’t a new concept.

      Ask any LoL or Destiny 2 player.

      But in all seriousness, sometimes a game is just too massive to form an opinion on in any reasonable amount of time.

      • ManjuuLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes, this was exactly how I felt when playing Fire Emblem Engage. God. I hated how the hub world basically sucked an equal amount of time for each map I cleared. Sure, the mini-games are optional,But so is brushing your teeth.

        I may be getting older but it feels like a lot of games are just padding their runtime with gameplay that doesn’t mesh well at all.

    • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      To be fair, the game is so massive, any review (positive or negative) done on less than 60 hours probably won’t do the game justice. It’s entirely possible to hold hope for redeeming qualities only to be a bit disappointed in the end.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        IDK, I think 10 hours is plenty for any game, and 2 hours is enough for most. By two hours, you’ve likely discovered the core gameplay loop and seen how it handles progression, and by 10 hours you’ve seen whether that core gameplay loop changes throughout the game.

        I don’t like negative reviews for games when they’ve spent double the time HLTB gives for a playthrough. I don’t expect to play much more than “main + extras” on any game, so any review that’s expecting content beyond that just isn’t useful for me.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The thing is, with big RPGs like Starfield, you decide what your core gameplay loop is. It has multiple.

          So if you find out the core gameplay loop is not for you after 2 hours, you can just try an other one.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            But it doesn’t excel at any of those play styles. It’s the classic case of “Jack of all trades, master of none.”

            I guess it’s fine if it’s the only game you play, but if you have choice, I don’t see why you’d pick Starfield over other games you could get. It’s kind of like the cult around Minecraft, you can play pretty much any style you want with mods (e.g. soccer, Pokemon, roller coaster, etc), but every style is done much better in a standalone game.

            So I give Starfield an 8/10 or a B, it’s pretty good, but it doesn’t really stand out in any particular way.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Customers aren’t professional reviewers. Paying customers are entitled to have their opinion at any time. Tiny Tina’s Wonderland immediately put me off with that lame overworld. I think I clocked around 3 hours and then uninstalled it. Never ever would I spend dozens of hours in a game where a significant portion massively annoys me.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      Honestly, the games that take the most time I often have more negative opinions about. The Assassin’s Creed games, for example, purposefully waste your time. They shove a bunch of junk in and try to make you interact with it when I could be doing something enjoying with my time. Enjoyment per hour should be the measure of a good game, not hours alone. If the game takes me 300h to complete and I only enjoyed 10h of that, it’s a bad game.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes exactly!

        Games are meant to entertain. If they aren’t fun or force you to do unfun things, then why waste your time on them?

        I got the same with collectibles in games. Chasing collectibles is boring to me, and you will never see me going for one that isn’t directly on my path. It is meaningless fluff.

    • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well they kept getting told this game is a slow burn, so they kept at it, waiting for the fun.

      (Just cracking a joke here folks, based off the reports it takes a dozen hours for it to get good)

      • hypelightfly@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I have about 30 hours in it now. I wouldn’t say it gets any better over that time, if you didn’t like it at the beginning you won’t like it after 30 hours.

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m sorry, are you mocking me for replaying Chrono trigger? That shit is a masterpiece.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Chrono Trigger was the first example of a game that came to my head that’s just great. I replayed it a few weeks ago as well. It’s time better spent than playing a shitty game for 100 hours.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          IDK, I bailed around halfway through. I got to the Magus fight, and it felt really RNG dependent. If he attacked in a certain order, I would lose a team member and eventually lose because I couldn’t keep up with healing.

          Maybe I was too low level, or maybe I didn’t have the right items equipped, IDK, but I completely lost interest when I failed several times without knowing what to do differently except hope that he attacked in a different order. So I bailed.

          Maybe I’ll try it again sometime. I originally played on my phone, but maybe I’ll have more patience on my Steam Deck. I really enjoyed the game up to that point, but I just couldn’t bear the RNG. I have no problem failing over and over (I love the early Ys games and some bosses took a dozen tries), but I need to see some sort of progress.

    • DrQuint@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      If a narrative-heavy game takes 60 hours and then fucks it up on the third act, it deserves the hate. Games having a bad payoff 200% warrants bad reviews.

      Oh sorry, this isn’t a Danganronpa thread.

  • poke@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Eh, guess I’ll drop my review.

    The game seems good and mostly well made, with the best hand-crafted environments I’ve ever seen from Bethesda.

    But when it comes to the core gameplay loop, I feel like I’ve played this game already and I got bored very, very quickly.

    It truly plays like Fallout 4 but with more menus and loading screens in order to fast travel somewhere. There is space combat, but it doesn’t feel compelling to me. Click on bad ship until kaboom.

    You want to fast travel? Drop some things, you can’t fast travel while encumbered. Please undock first, we have some quest events tied to undocking and we don’t want you to miss those. Please fast travel to the planet before landing at a location, we have some quest events tied to the space around planets and we don’t want you to miss those.

    Again though, the game is generally well made and I can see a lot of people truly enjoying it and the many gameplay systems you can dive into like settlement, ship, crew building, and side questing.

    The slower-paced looter shooter gameplay loop just really isn’t for me right now. I’d rather play Fallout or Borderlands.

    Note that I haven’t commented on the story. I don’t feel like I’ve experienced enough of it to really give a good opinion on it. I’ve played 4 hours.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It isn’t really a slower paced looter shooter, hell I barely loot anything and talk my way out of most situations.

      It is more of a story based RPG, where you carve your own story out of the game. You decide what kind of character you want to play, and which quests you follow and which you ditch, anything is permitted.

      If the only thing you do is go inside a random dungeon, shoot anything that moves, loot anything that isn’t nailed down and then go sell it, you won’t have a great time.

      If you want to enjoy the game more, I’d suggest to choose a trope for your character: diplomatic Federation Captain, cunning Bounty Hunter, vicious Space Pirate, hardened Space Trucker, curious Scientific Explorer, …

      Then find a quest line that synergies with your trope and follow it all the way through. Making decisions based upon how your character would react, not just what option will give you the most loot or is the easiest to accomplish.

      Starfield has all the scifi tropes imaginable, kind of like what Skyrim had with Fantasy.

      Currently I am enjoying my interpretation of the backstory of Captain Jean-Luc Picard of Star Trek. Being as helpful as I can, making philosophical statements and trying to find a diplomatic solution to anything. I change the UC to be the Federation and the Vanguard to be Starfleet. And recreated the USS Enterprise to the best of my abilities.

      I had a blast for the whole ~26 hours I played.

  • Pregnenolone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think I’m just getting old. Games like Starfield are boring the hell out of me. I played it for about 1.5hrs then uninstalled it.

      • Afrazzle@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s been in the top 10 (and often in top 5) concurrent players on steam since release so I think you just don’t like it, but many others still do.

    • Delusional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Because they’ve been making the same game just with different settings for 20+ years and it been overused. You may have fun with the game if you didn’t play the last few Bethesda games or you still enjoy that type but it is stale for most who have played fallout 3, nv, 4 and the elder scrolls games for most of their lives. There’s just nothing new.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      If you can already know the game is boring after 1.5 hours, the game is indeed not for you.

      I thought it was yet an other boring scifi shooter, but gave it a try after seeing someone else playing it. Then I saw how much of a Star Trek TNG vibes it had.

    • DCLXVI@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      You must have such a refined taste to not waste more than 90 minutes on starfield. May I recommend Elden Ring or Baldur’s Gate 3 for a discerning individual such as yourself.