***The Official Starfield Thread*** (As endorsed by TNA)

Before i say this I’ll preface it by commenting that i am usually a graphics whore (i struggle to go back and play older titles i love) and everyone has the right to their opinions on any aspect of the game. That being said this is one of the few games where, yes some of the eye candy is past it’s sell by date (not all) and some of the traditional Bethesda bugs are there (again not all, not even close) but, for me, it just has something about it that makes me want to keep going back.

It’s a greater than the sum of its parts type situation. Bugs aren't game breaking, even the ropey graphical aspects are still passable, the loading parts are very quick - it’s just a great game (to me, ymmv). I don’t care enough about the lack of dlss, decent hdr etc when the game as a whole is this much fun.
 
Last edited:
The game seems to be running well on Linux. I switched back to Arch today and everything was just plug and play. Performance is as good if not slightly better some of the time. Crossing my fingers for a performance batch...

iu

nvm....
 
rumple9 said:
That said, it's a typical Bethesda title - they make half a game and the modding community has to finish it off.
Click to expand...

Heh, so true.

Which raises a point. How do people feel about heavily modding a game like this? Does this take it away from the 'vision' of the devs and perhaps devalue it in some way? Or does it enhance it? I'll be honest, I'm on the fence a bit. I don't mind modding some minor quality of life or cosmetic stuff, but I baulk at things which alter core gameplay mechanics. For me personally, it feels that mods can often devalue the challenge of a game.

I think one of the reasons I'm enjoying Baldur's Gate 3 at the moment is the fact it can't [currently] be modded. So everyone is faced with the same level playing field and people can discuss all the different ways of tackling the game's challenges from an equal perspective. The moment someone is able to say "oh I modded that out" or "oh I adjusted that with a mod" then everything changes.

I'm not knocking anyone who likes to use mods, it's a personal choice. Just wondering aloud about how a game studio that heavily supports / permits modding might take some development choices that might not otherwise be made if the game was a 'sealed' product.
 
PitterPatter said:
Before i say this I’ll preface it by commenting that i am usually a graphics whore (i struggle to go back and play older titles i love) and everyone has the right to their opinions on any aspect of the game. That being said this is one of the few games where, yes some of the eye candy is past it’s sell by date (not all) and some of the traditional Bethesda bugs are there (again not all, not even close) but, for me, it just has something about it that makes me want to keep going back.

It’s a greater than the sum of its parts type situation. Bugs aren't game breaking, even the ropey graphical aspects are still passable, the loading parts are very quick - it’s just a great game (to me, ymmv). I don’t care enough about the lack of dlss, decent hdr etc when the game as a whole is this much fun.
Click to expand...

I guess people are just disappointed about how good it could have been (IE even better than it is), with not a lot more work/additions.
 
Cern said:
Heh, so true.

Which raises a point. How do people feel about heavily modding a game like this? Does this take it away from the 'vision' of the devs and perhaps devalue it in some way? Or does it enhance it? I'll be honest, I'm on the fence a bit. I don't mind modding some minor quality of life or cosmetic stuff, but I baulk at things which alter core gameplay mechanics. For me personally, it feels that mods can often devalue the challenge of a game.

I think one of the reasons I'm enjoying Baldur's Gate 3 at the moment is the fact it can't [currently] be modded. So everyone is faced with the same level playing field and people can discuss all the different ways of tackling the game's challenges from an equal perspective. The moment someone is able to say "oh I modded that out" or "oh I adjusted that with a mod" then everything changes.

I'm not knocking anyone who likes to use mods, it's a personal choice. Just wondering aloud about how a game studio that heavily supports / permits modding might take some development choices that might not otherwise be made if the game was a 'sealed' product.
Click to expand...

It needs to be modded. At the very least quality of life updates that don't change mechanics. SkyUI (skyrim) being the classic example as this makes the entire UI far, far better in every way.
 
Last edited:
Cern said:
Heh, so true.

Which raises a point. How do people feel about heavily modding a game like this? Does this take it away from the 'vision' of the devs and perhaps devalue it in some way? Or does it enhance it? I'll be honest, I'm on the fence a bit. I don't mind modding some minor quality of life or cosmetic stuff, but I baulk at things which alter core gameplay mechanics. For me personally, it feels that mods can often devalue the challenge of a game.

I think one of the reasons I'm enjoying Baldur's Gate 3 at the moment is the fact it can't [currently] be modded. So everyone is faced with the same level playing field and people can discuss all the different ways of tackling the game's challenges from an equal perspective. The moment someone is able to say "oh I modded that out" or "oh I adjusted that with a mod" then everything changes.

I'm not knocking anyone who likes to use mods, it's a personal choice. Just wondering aloud about how a game studio that heavily supports / permits modding might take some development choices that might not otherwise be made if the game was a 'sealed' product.
Click to expand...
When their vision is basic, there isn't much to take away from.
 
Cantankerous said:
It needs to be modded. At the very least quality of life updates that don't change mechanics. SkyUI (skyrim) being the classic example as this makes the entire UI far, far better in every way.
Click to expand...
I think the most baffling one to me is the filter thing that everyone is removing with the reshades and so on, I dont seem to see a single person who doesnt think it looks far better without that green/grey tint to everything. Which just makes me wonder how it is that nobody at Bethesda pointed it out and that it should be removed. Maybe the studio is full of yes men who dont want to rock the boat, I dont know, but its odd to me when something is SO widely agreed upon to be a bad thing but somehow it was kept in.
 
Tombstone said:
I think the most baffling one to me is the filter thing that everyone is removing with the reshades and so on, I dont seem to see a single person who doesnt think it looks far better without that green/grey tint to everything. Which just makes me wonder how it is that nobody at Bethesda pointed it out and that it should be removed. Maybe the studio is full of yes men who dont want to rock the boat, I dont know, but its odd to me when something is SO widely agreed upon to be a bad thing but somehow it was kept in.
Click to expand...

I don't know. There seems to be a lot of people with questionable eyesight working on things like this!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom