• BolexForSoup@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The problem with Starfield is, I think a lot of us expected Bethesda to take a big step forward, and they dropped a B to B+ game.

      Sure, we can blame hype, but it’s not like they didn’t contribute to it. And dropping right after BG3 certainly didn’t help.

      Credit where credit is due though. It’s definitely the most stable release they have dropped on day one by a large margin. I commend them for that.

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

        Where did Bethesda overhype?

        They marketed it as Skyrim in Space and delivered it exactly like that.

        Most overhyping happened because of the players.

        • BolexForSoup@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I am not getting bogged down in interpreting their words. They absolutely acted like this is the next big leap forward, and it really wasn’t. If you don’t agree with that that’s fine it’s an opinion. One that i think is wrong, but an opinion nonetheless.

          Though I do think it bears mentioning that I highly doubt they they literally meant “a 12 year old game, but in space.” If that’s your bar then yeah it’s a noticeable improvement.

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      After so much time and so many iterations Bethesda hasn’t improved much on the things they suck at. This is just fallout in space with all the issues previous games have.

    • distantsounds@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      30 of those 70 hours were spent on loading screens. Seriously though, it takes time to give the game a chance and with all they hype behind it, I thought I was missing out on something and kept telling myself “maybe it’ll start getting good after this mission” …I wasn’t missing anything, it was the game that was lacking

    • Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Come on, when was the last time you played a 4 for 70 hours. A 6 or 7 sure, but you played and talked about the game non-stop for 3 weeks. Talking about how you didn’t want to work, just wanted to play all day. A 4 does not do that to you.

      There have been plenty of games over the years where I got hooked on one aspect that was fun or compelling, only to tire of it much later and realize the overall game was actually mediocre and just happened to scratch the right itch for a while.

      Open world RPGs tend to make up a lot of that list since they have repeated content that draws you in the first time you encounter it, but wears out its welcome by the hundredth. It sounds like Starfield had this problem, combined with a terrible fast travel system that gutted exploration and threw the samey content into the spotlight. Once the new game shine wore off a lot of players were like “is this it?”

      (I’ll note that I haven’t played the game yet, this is just the gist of the complaints I’ve read)