LogFAQs > #979489500

FurryPhilosifer posted...

I enjoyed starfield but the writing was just... super bad. The setting is completely underdeveloped and loads of stuff just isn't really touched upon at all. The character dialogue is nearly all embarrassing to listen to. Any so many quests feel like it would have been less work to make them interesting.

But the ships are great. I love discovering different planets. I wish the outpost stuff worked because before I realised there was no real solution to getting it all to work I was having great fun with them. The UC Vanguard questline was one of the best questlines Bethesda has ever done. And I enjoy the levelling system.

I might go play it actually. But it is definitely lacking in writing. At least Skyrim and Fallout have interesting settings and world building for each game. Starfields setting feels unfinished.

Think the biggest issue is Starfield isn't really integrating the different things very well with each other, so it feels like trying to be 9 different games poorly rather than one game well.

Think the outposts are a good example here. In Fallout 4, the settlements were a mandatory part of the whole story. It was a bit annoying if you didn't enjoy the settlement mechanic, but if you wanted to ignroe it you didn't have to do that much. And if you did like it, you had a legitimate impact on the game and could see the changes you were doing. In Starfield the outposts are totally pointless, because it has no relation on the rest of the game, and even in the game itself, its frankly more efficient to just go to a store and buy all the random materials you would need.

If the travel wasn't unlimited, the outposts could be interesting as a way you need to grind for fuel for all of your jumps, but then that would make the explore 1000 planets thing terrible because you'd need 1000 outposts, and if you don't like the outposts, the game is unplayable, not a little annoying. If you only had like 4-5 planets to explore, this would be fine, because you'd only need 1-2 outposts, and they could be as automated as you wanted them to be.

Add to that none of the stories really relate to each other. The Crimson Fleet shouldn't want a high ranking Navy Scab as a leader (or vice versa), and neither the UC or Freestar Collective should be okay with you both being a Ranger and you being a high-ranking member of the navy when they were very recently at war with each other. Heck, you can be a high ranking member of the UC Navy, then explicitly betray the UC SysDef to lead the Crimson Raiders, and it's just like... fine. That is not something that should just be ignored. And none of these relate to the overall story, when they so easily could have. Think the game would be so much better with a Fallout 4-esque "You need to choose one faction eventually" to the story, and then you could get a bunch of Freestar Rangers, or the UC Navy, or a bunch of Pirates to help you in the final level when you go confront The Emissary or the Hunter. It also would have made the New Game + lead up with the Starborn stuff a lot more interesting, because there's a lot more that could vary from one playthrough to another.