Current Events > Anyone concerned that Starfield beng set in space is just gnna make it...boring?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Seeing the gameplay trailer, I dont really have high hopes. Just look at the environment. It's such a far cry from Bethesda's Fallout and Elder Scrolls.

Planets are naturally going to be very very empty and deserted planes, but this also means the game simply wont be fun when we get to traversed these planets. Who cares if there's 1000 planets if the biomes are all just going to be same over entire stretches of each planet?

I really really dont want this game to suck, but it does indeed give me No Man's Sky vibes. There's a reason why sci-fi space games always tend to focus on interior settings or big building locations on planets, not the planet's environment itself. Because most planets in space are really just boring deserts.

Like just look at Mars. Who wanna walk miles and miles across completely empty barren wastelands?

Best Bethesda can do is focus most of the game take place in the major cities instead. I really can't give two s***ts about travelling to another random planet in the galaxy with no life where I spend hours burning down minerals.

I was initially intrigued by Starfield when we knew barely anything about it. Now that details are coming out, im losing interest. It will probably suck

Zikten posted...

I was initially intrigued by Starfield when we knew barely anything about it. Now that details are coming out, im losing interest. It will probably suck

I'm only interested in the game because well, it's Bethesda and I have high hopes they will make a substantial city this time. Not cluster some 10-15 houses together and call it a 'city' like they did in Skyrim.

I'm not concerned. I have absolute faith the game will be a boring slog.

Mackorov posted...

I'm only interested in the game because well, it's Bethesda and I have high hopes they will make a substantial city this time. Not cluster some 10-15 houses together and call it a 'city' like they did in Skyrim.

I think we have opposite hopes.

Nope. It my goty 2023

Ever since Oblivion and Fallout 3, i've been of the mindset of "I want this in space" so i'll wait til I play it before deciding. I liked Outer Worlds more than most did, so my expectations are probably a bit higher.

Im concerned that the trailer just looked pretty boring

Also the whole there will be hundreds of planets to explore just says to me that a lot if not most of it will be procedurally generated and pretty uninteresting to explore.

Fallout 3 had Operation Zeta, gave me a taste for Bethesda space games.

To be clear, I am under no illusions. It's a Bethesda game, which means it's going to be buggy on release, and the main story is going to be weak. The sidequests are going to be far more interesting, and modders will add boobs. Set your expectations to that, and you won't be disappointed (unless you are on a consoles that doesn't allow boobs).

Mackorov posted...

I'm only interested in the game because well, it's Bethesda and I have high hopes they will make a substantial city this time. Not cluster some 10-15 houses together and call it a 'city' like they did in Skyrim.

They said that the capitol city, New Atlantis or whatever, is a bit bigger than the Imperial City in Oblivion.

Bethesda just doesn't do huge city scapes, unless they were procedurally generated like in Daggerfall.

008Zulu posted...

Fallout 3 had Operation Zeta, gave me a taste for Bethesda space games.

Thought that was the worst dlc tbh. Just an overlong shooting gallery with no real plot.

Nah, they already said there's going to be more handcrafted environments than any other ES or Fallout game, and the procedural 1,000 planets are just a supplement to the main ones.

Procedurally generated environments pretty much always end up samey and boring.

TheUmbersun posted...

Thought that was the worst dlc tbh. Just an overlong shooting gallery with no real plot.

It was, but I did like getting in to a shooting match with the other ship.

I couldn't get into Skyrim or Fallout 3. The instant I heard that this one had "a thousand planets," I knew it'd be even worse than those two.

They also said you cant free roam the universe. You just pick a destination planet and do a loading screen. It sounds like it works like ship travel in the star wars mmo The Old Republic

They should have just done like 30 nicely detailed planets

Zikten posted...

They also said you cant free roam the universe. You just pick a destination planet and do a loading screen. It sounds like it works like ship travel in the star wars mmo The Old Republic

They should have just done like 30 nicely detailed planets

It should have been something like Subnautica in space. You have a galaxy with however many planets, but the space between those planets is just as detailed as any Skyrim landscape.

Zikten posted...

They also said you cant free roam the universe. You just pick a destination planet and do a loading screen. It sounds like it works like ship travel in the star wars mmo The Old Republic

It's a bit more like Mass Effect really. You fly into a system, see a list of planets, do sensor sweeps for basic readings, then float about in orbit looking for spikes of anything interesting(Bethesda-placed structures and events will show up via a marker). Once you select a spot to land the game generates the nearby landscapes and you can elect to build an Outpost to harvest resources or whatnot.

Its probably all just mod bait. More planets means more spaces to mod means more longevity means more long term sales like Skyrim. Whether it will work is another question. I feel like any good will towards the Bethesda launch jank is dwindling as years and releases go by.

Nemu posted...

Its probably all just mod bait. More planets means more spaces to mod means more longevity means more long term sales like Skyrim. Whether it will work is another question. I feel like any good will towards the Bethesda launch jank is dwindling as years and releases go by.

But why do they even need the planets for? Modders can just add their own planets entirely to make. This whole procedural generation thing is f***ing stupid and sounds like another stupid idea from Todd Howard so he can boast about it in his presentations. Like when he said, 'oh you can go to that mountain' during the Skyrim presentaiton but failed to say the mountain has been shrunk 100x in size compared to a real mountain

I think as well as the big empty planets we'll have more traditional Bethesda spaces, like the cities and the areas around them, or the dungeons, etc.. I'm always an advocate for more empty space in games. Bugged me in Red Dead Redemption that you can never get "lost in the desert", and you're always 20 yards from a road. Of course I don't want just empty space, but as I said, I expect traditional Bethesda environments as well as the barren planets. Space is my favourite setting, and Bethesda games are my favourite RPGs, so I'm pretty hyped.

It was a bummer to me how bland and generic the environments they showed in the trailer looked, for sure

space as a setting, you could literally do anything and most of what they showed was gray rock

i was hoping something more akin to a big budget outer worlds

I would think of Starfield less as its own game and more as a stellar platform for mods.

008Zulu posted...

Fallout 3 had Operation Zeta, gave me a taste for Bethesda space games.

So it'll be unmitigated shit

DuneMan posted...

It's a bit more like Mass Effect really. You fly into a system, see a list of planets, do sensor sweeps for basic readings, then float about in orbit looking for spikes of anything interesting(Bethesda-placed structures and events will show up via a marker). Once you select a spot to land the game generates the nearby landscapes and you can elect to build an Outpost to harvest resources or whatnot.

If this is the case, then each planet's map could conceivably be as large as Fallout 76's map (approx. 24,038 square miles). This would mean extensive loading transition going from space to planet, if you're running on a HDD. Definitely going to want an SSD for this title.

im meh on the base experience but I hope it ends up being a great canvas for modders without some forced paid Creation Club shit thrown it.

It's my assumption that there will be a tether distance to the ship. So you can't walk the whole planet at once, but will need to hop back in the ship and move it to a new spot on the planet.

TheGoldenEel posted...

It was a bummer to me how bland and generic the environments they showed in the trailer looked, for sure

space as a setting, you could literally do anything and most of what they showed was gray rock

i was hoping something more akin to a big budget outer worlds

well you have to keep in mind Starfield's setting is more primitive. It takes place just a while after humans have discovered space. Also it's a lot more realistic given planets out there IRL really are that barren and lifeless

it looks boring as fuck.

I read the topic title as Seinfeld in space and now I can't stop thinking of that.

Maybe we can have Online Player driven Colonization for Towns / Cities?

Instead of depending on Betheseda to do everything, let the player base colonize the game world and make natural Towns / Cities.

its no "No Mans Sky".

But I appreciate the love and care that went into the recent updates overs that past few years.

KamenRiderBlade posted...

Maybe we can have Online Player driven Colonization for Towns / Cities?

Instead of depending on Betheseda to do everything, let the player base colonize the game world and make natural Towns / Cities.

Ever heard of the disaster called FO76?

Mackorov posted...

well you have to keep in mind Starfield's setting is more primitive. It takes place just a while after humans have discovered space. Also it's a lot more realistic given planets out there IRL really are that barren and lifeless

Ok but they picked the setting, and that setting is boring

It really depends on the execution.

If I know where to find the scripted content and interesting stuff then the 1,000 planets doesn't matter. I don't need every inch of the game to be interesting. If someone wants to land on a moon to collect some rocks then they can do that. It helps making the universe feel a bit more believable if there's a lot of nothing. If people want to make a base on a planet that has literally nothing other than a good view I think it's cool they can do that. On top of that modders can use these spaces to fill it with whatever they want. So in a sense a lot of that empty space can potentially be a sandbox for people.

So ultimately it depends on how much it feels like I need to wander through empty space. If it's up to the player then I think it's fine. But if the scripted content and quests are also boring then it's a fail.

I am of the opinion that an open world makes more sense if it's paced well instead of cramming it in with objective markers and enemy outposts.

I'm pretty sure all the surface locations are small zones like The Outer Worlds/Mass Effect/Kotor, its just strange that non-key planets look barren as fuck. They may as well make it like No Mans Sky but that'll probably make the engine shit the bed.

They really need to make this clearer instead of burying it in interviews. A ton of people still seem under the impression that you can land everywhere and its basically no mans sky lol.

I think BGS does the best open worlds in gaming, but I am a little worried that the vast scope of the game may dilute that. That said, it's a new IP and they've had *lots* of time to work on it, so I'm staying hopeful. I'm sure I'll buy and enjoy it even if it's not perfect.

I think the best balance would be to make some planets that are populated that resemble their previous games. Basically just go off an explore and find stuff. I guess like the size of a DLC island from their previous games. Also ones that have the major settlements that are like the cities. You get the quests and factions from these ones and they will send you off to other planets with a specific objective to find or do.

Then the rest of the planets literally have nothing other than resources and aliens for farming and building. Maybe the odd pirate base. But it's really obvious this is the case before you bother landing there.

Then hide the odd planet with some really, really weird shit on it.

Mackorov posted...

Ever heard of the disaster called FO76?

Then Bethesda needs to do a better job.