Quoting for future lols

No man's sky was boring tho because all there was to do was explore, gather resources, build a base.

There was no real campaign, no enemies to fight, no conflicts or anything really that made you want to keep playing... Unless you just really like farming materials and building bases. You couldn't even dogfight and it was a flying game.


This game is so far beyond no man's sky literally the only comparison is being able to explore planets.

I imagine because many people now spend so much time invested in a virtual world. In my teens, guys who played for 8 hours a day were considered total losers, now that's just normie numbers. If you aren't playing at least 12 hours a day you aren't making it very far in the ranking system. So devs have to keep people invested in their games as long as possible. They want gamers to come back and pay for all the MTX and DLC content, etc.

starfield will feel like andromeda or even worse, but better graphics and gameplay

I’m on the other side of the fence.

Looking forward to going into this without knowing the plot or the world situation. Should be pretty fun watching it unfold over the next couple of years.

The Prey reboot proved you can make an amazing immersive space RPG totally different from the Mass Effect formula though. And if this game turns out to be as good as either, won’t have much to complain about.

Don’t really want to be put in a Cyberpunk 2077 situation where I know the first few hours before I even finish them.

But these huge games take up so much space. Red Dead 2, Forza Horizon and NBA are well over 100gb each and have just sat on my SSD for years. I’m glad they reduced the expansion card cost and will pick one up when I get home.

Storage is by far the most limiting factor on consoles for me these days. The fact that the Series X doesn’t support plug in USB C SSDs is very frustrating. I don’t think PS5 does either, what were they thinking?

They’re simply two completely different games. No man’s sky story/lore probably won’t compete with whatever starfield comes up with but there is no way starfield will have the same exploratory experience that current no man’s sky has

Can we please stop comparing Bethesda games to Mass Effect? The similarities begin and end with the games being located in outer space.

On spread.

First off, I have to say that what Bethesda showed offdidimpress me and it looks like it could be a technical marvel for a space open world game if they successfully pull off the typical Bethesda interactivity with such a grand scope.

They at least managed to peel back that early secrecy that fueled a lot of my early doubts and concerns, like how there seemed to be a nice variety of biomes and alien fauna, the ship building looks stellar with loads of potential, and the same goes for all of the space flight and combat.

After marinating a bit, though, I do feel like I'm settling back to a lingering sense of apathy here at theworldworldgalaxy of Starfield itself. Something missing like a hook helps describe it, and the "alien mystery" doesn't cut it. As much as some sort of parallel to The Expanse might give me some hope there, at the same time that's also towards the bottom of what I found interesting about that series to begin with, and this is even lower given how trite that whole premise is for sci-fi.

Either way, I'm not inanyrush to play Starfield and there's a reason the unmodded game is called "vanilla" - it's perfectly fine, really good even, but only someone in denial would believe that's as good as it gets.


Spot on with the generic music because it ironically stuck out to me like a sore thumb. Meanwhile, Jeremy Soule's music could give you chills or lull you to sleep. But after the Doom Eternal fiasco, it's like there's something about Bethesda and fukking over musicians.

Last, I still stand by the exclusion of playable alien races sucks. I'd 110% trade some TVTropes alien artifact plot to play as a spaceorcorcork and be called a filthy n'wah by space elves.
Coming off of Skyrim - modded, mind you, Ireallywanted to give Fallout 4 a shot,reallytried to get excited for the world, but for the life of me it's just not a game that I give a solitary schit about. I never played New Vegas (which from what I gather is thegoodone, but also by Obsidian instead of Bethesda) after Fallout 3 felt like terrible shooting in a dull, schit-brown dump compared to Oblivion's vibrant world, and a million times more next to The Shivering Isles. Eventually I just accepted the series isn't my cup of tea, but damn does it suck seeing how much Fallout crap Bethesda has pumped out when it isn't an IP originally by them and generally seen as being done better by others like the originals and Obsidian versus proper TES content.

Anyway, I was already seeing shimmers of Bethesda's Fallout DNA in Starfield early on, just uncanny nuances I picked up on in the art direction, and the space cowboy planet (what the fukk?) pretty much confirms as much in and of itself. I'm just not entirely sold on the overall aesthetic here; the space and ship stuff looks great, but the a lot of the player equipment looks silly, the space snake cult people sounded ridiculous, the "cyberpunk" city looked cringey, and all of the literal space cowboy stuff looks daft.

I still hope the game delivers, but I'm not hyping anything.
Given the theme/setting, I don't mind the ship building aspect since it at appeared to be cohesive with the rest of the role playing elements and looked like a good incentive to earn and spend your money. So long as it's not tied into aspie-simulator rock lasering.

Then once you're out of the ship, forget the RPG elements - looking over theleveling systemandcurrently known skillsand it's deep in "why even bother?" territory.

The factions also came off as rather dull, but I guess we'll see. If you go back to Skyrim, it's a shame to see how much they cut back on faction interactions because various Skyrim civil war mods made it absolutely nuts. I remember having all out wars between holds as each faction would try to take over territory.