Starfield [XBSX|S, PC, XGP]

[Shortbread]

"Anyhow, the game seems fairly bland at this point and the gameplay that was shown, wasn't necessarily all that different from Star Citizen."

I must have misunderstood that. My bad.

You did. My opinion wasn't that this game shouldn't exist, but that it wasn't necessarily all that different from Star Citizen. The crafting & base-building aspects may make up for some of the less than impressive performance and dated visuals though.

 

[mr magoo]

You did. My opinion wasn't that this game shouldn't exist, but that it wasn't necessarily all that different from Star Citizen. The crafting & base-building aspects may make up for some of the less than impressive performance and dated visuals though.

Thanks. Thats why i like to hang out here as non native english speaking person, not only i have chance to talk to people smarter than me but in english. It stimulates the brain, and in my age is only good.

 

[Seanspeed]

I seriously, just seriously dont understand the comments saying the graphics are dated/not good. It's like we're seeing completely different games or something.

 

[orangpelupa]

Btw I just realized that the trailer didn't show atmosphere transition to/from space, and in-atmosphere flights.

Sure in NMS it is gimmicky, and far less "whoa" than ace combat or flight simulator, but it was still a nice thing to experience. Made me feels like the world is really connected with the space.

I wonder if starfield will actually just use canned scenes like freelancer?

 

[Malo]

Star Citizen is designed moreso as a multiplayer persistent universe sandbox whereas Starfield is a single player CRPG. I guess they're similar because they're open world space flight games? But there's not much crossover IMO.

Not even SC42 is similar because that's going to be a campaign focused linear story like Wing Commander series.

 

[Malo]

Btw I just realized that the trailer didn't show atmosphere transition to/from space, and in-atmosphere flights.

Sure in NMS it is gimmicky, and far less "whoa" than ace combat or flight simulator, but it was still a nice thing to experience. Made me feels like the world is really connected with the space.

I wonder if starfield will actually just use canned scenes like freelancer?

Knowing Bethesda's limitations, it's likely a load zone with a landing sequence to a specific modelled portion of the planets rather than true open galaxy flight and planet transition.

 

[Shortbread]

I seriously, just seriously dont understand the comments saying the graphics are dated/not good. It's like we're seeing completely different games or something.

I got a certain amount of resistance when I stated Grand Turismo 7 graphics looked dated, and that Forza Horizon 5 was far superior in that regard. For me anyhow, Starfield wasn't all that impressive in that case, and the uneven performance didn't help either.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

I seriously, just seriously dont understand the comments saying the graphics are dated/not good. It's like we're seeing completely different games or something.

For me it's both impressive and at the same time unimpressive graphically. For an open world game, especially at this scale, I'm incredibly impressed. OTOH - there's some things that I kind of take for granted in many modern AAA games, like footprints in the ground which were missing when the robot left the ship. The environments looked fantastic but some of them have a sort of older Bethesda open world game feel to them while others felt fresher and more inspired. Some NPC animations looked fine while others seemed oddly stilted.

Perhaps a better description of how the graphics struck me was uneven. That might give some the impression that the graphics are dated/not good, but I think it speaks more to the massive nature of the game. Some of the handcrafted areas are going to look less polished than others just due to the sheer amount of effort required by the artists and set piece designers.

But that said, over all I thought it looked like a good current gen. game of this magnitude. The only other game that is in the same league as this WRT world/universe size and scale is No Man's Sky and it's obviously quite significantly better than that.

So, yeah if someone really wanted to nitpick, they can probably find examples of something looking barely better than last gen. But if one were to be fair, most of it is a pretty large upgrade over last gen, IMO. Is it Cyberpunk 2077 or Horizon Forbidden West levels of graphical greatness? No, but it's also doing a LOT more than either Cyberpunk 2077 or Horizon Forbidden West.

Regards,
SB

 

[RobertR1]

Give me a good HDR implementation and graphics are more or less covered.

What I want from the game is meals not nibbles.

I’d like the story quests to be fleshed out and intertwined.

Cut down on the fetching and collecting. Balance out interactions with npc’s to where the interaction itself is the key driver and not just a stepping stone to a combat sequence. Just like how a good stealth game can by played without killing, why can’t the power of persuasion be a primary factor for advancing in a rpg?

 

[orangpelupa]

Give me a good HDR implementation and graphics are more or less covered.

What I want from the game is meals not nibbles.

I’d like the story quests to be fleshed out and intertwined.

Cut down on the fetching and collecting. Balance out interactions with npc’s to where the interaction itself is the key driver and not just a stepping stone to a combat sequence. Just like how a good stealth game can by played without killing, why can’t the power of persuasion be a primary factor for advancing in a rpg?

Its a Bethesda game tho. It's probably filled with lots off generic and boring side Quests.

Hopefully the amounts of engaging hand crafted Quests are numerous enough.

Btw has any Bethesda games got good hdr implementation?

HDR in space would be pretty sweet. And the lazers.

 

[Malo]

The first line of the gameplay reveal annoys the shit out of me:

"According to the scanners, the abandoned research facility is in this direction"

You mean that building below us we literally just flew over? Glad we have scanners and the helpful robot to guide us. I hate stupid writing just for the sake of handholding an intro tutorial.

 

[Malo]

Knowing Bethesda's limitations, it's likely a load zone with a landing sequence to a specific modelled portion of the planets rather than true open galaxy flight and planet transition.

Watching the full 15:00 video, Todd does mention you can land anywhere on the planet, so at least it looks like they're complete surfaces. Which would have to suggest you can fly across the planet surface as you couldn't possibly be expected to explore a planet surface on foot or ground vehicle.

I'd also have to hazard a guess that the planets wouldn't really be realistically proportioned, otherwise there's going to be a lot of very boring surface exploration.

 

[Seanspeed]

For me it's both impressive and at the same time unimpressive graphically. For an open world game, especially at this scale, I'm incredibly impressed. OTOH - there's some things that I kind of take for granted in many modern AAA games, like footprints in the ground which were missing when the robot left the ship. The environments looked fantastic but some of them have a sort of older Bethesda open world game feel to them while others felt fresher and more inspired. Some NPC animations looked fine while others seemed oddly stilted.

Perhaps a better description of how the graphics struck me was uneven. That might give some the impression that the graphics are dated/not good, but I think it speaks more to the massive nature of the game. Some of the handcrafted areas are going to look less polished than others just due to the sheer amount of effort required by the artists and set piece designers.

But that said, over all I thought it looked like a good current gen. game of this magnitude. The only other game that is in the same league as this WRT world/universe size and scale is No Man's Sky and it's obviously quite significantly better than that.

So, yeah if someone really wanted to nitpick, they can probably find examples of something looking barely better than last gen. But if one were to be fair, most of it is a pretty large upgrade over last gen, IMO. Is it Cyberpunk 2077 or Horizon Forbidden West levels of graphical greatness? No, but it's also doing a LOT more than either Cyberpunk 2077 or Horizon Forbidden West.

Regards,
SB

I can definitely accept the 'unevenness' argument, Bethesda games are absolutely never gonna have super refined presentation values as a total package. But equally, I'd still say this beats out Cyberpunk 2077 overall. Especially with outdoor environments. CP2077 was at its best visually indoors with its heavily handcrafted interiors and whatnot and great character models(outside NPC's at least). I feel like Starfield is at least matching that level of indoor quality but with more impressive outdoor visuals at the same time. Even seems like Starfield is using some sort of advanced geometry technology(mesh shaders?), cuz it's definitely beyond what we'd typically expect outside something like UE5-based Nanite.

There will definitely be plenty of games that look better than Starfield this generation in screenshots and all that, but to say this looks bad or dated or something like some are saying is wild to me.

 

[Malo]

Even seems like Starfield is using some sort of advanced geometry technology(mesh shaders?), cuz it's definitely beyond what we'd typically expect outside something like UE5-based Nanite.

I'm not really seeing anything they're doing that would be pushing standard geometry technologies to justify mesh shaders or similar.

 

[Seanspeed]

Its a Bethesda game tho. It's probably filled with lots off generic and boring side Quests.

Hardly any RPG's with open world designs dont have their share of boring/generic/filler sidequests. Even The Witcher 3 has plenty of this, despite how it's often talked about.

But when it comes to interesting side quests/optional content, Bethesda still do this better than most.

Seems like people just tend to hold extremely high standards for Bethesda titles for some reason.

 

[Seanspeed]

I'm not really seeing anything they're doing that would be pushing standard geometry technologies to justify mesh shaders or similar.

Perhaps I'm just underestimating the base geometry capabilities of these console GPU's, but there seems to be little to no sign of any reduced complexity assets that I can tell. Every object with any sort of curvature seems to be represented as intended, and scene detail seems quite high overall.

Maybe it's not quite on the level of the sort of insanity we've seen with Nanite, but definitely well beyond what we're used to from the PS4/XB1 generation.

 

[dobwal]

Knowing Bethesda's limitations, it's likely a load zone with a landing sequence to a specific modelled portion of the planets rather than true open galaxy flight and planet transition.

They stated you can land anywhere on a planet and explore at least on the one with the city of Atlantis.

 

[eastmen]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1536369312650653697

It makes sense or they would have to record a lot of audio to make it inclusive

 

[orangpelupa]

Hardly any RPG's with open world designs dont have their share of boring/generic/filler sidequests. Even The Witcher 3 has plenty of this, despite how it's often talked about.

But when it comes to interesting side quests/optional content, Bethesda still do this better than most.

Seems like people just tend to hold extremely high standards for Bethesda titles for some reason.

AFAIR The difference is that Bethesda use radiant AI quest system for those kind of quest. So new Quests will keeps popping up

 

[Scott_Arm]

Can't say I'm interested in this at all.