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

BUDFORCE said:
Yea 100%.

I'm not buying Starfield for the space flight aspect, to be honest I'm not particularly interested in that part of the game at all.
Click to expand...
Same with me on this one, I'm very interested in the mobile base building and the planetary base building and I'm interested in all the cool looking planets and exploring them/doing quests, but I'm really not interested in the space flight/combat bits of Starfield , I've got Everspace 2 for that sort of thing.
 
Tombstone said:
Same with me on this one, I'm very interested in the mobile base building and the planetary base building and I'm interested in all the cool looking planets and exploring them/doing quests, but I'm really not interested in the space flight/combat bits of Starfield , I've got Everspace 2 for that sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Then why bother adding ship flight and combat then if its half arsed and many won't care about it?
 

APC-HYPE-TRAIN-gold-design-mock-forest-green-e1582144845469.png
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
Then why bother adding ship flight and combat then if its half arsed and many won't care about it?
Click to expand...
Simple, because I do not represent "many". There are lots and lots of games that have a particular aspect that I dont like whilst having many aspects that I do like, I do not make the presumption that my thoughts on that aspect in game X is indicative that "many" people feel the same way. Sadly, I do not carry that much significance in the world of gaming :D
 
Last edited:
TNA said:
Sounds great to me. Will likely be my GOTY.
Click to expand...
IF they pull it off, it will be a contender for my GOTY, which at the moment is likely to be a two way fight between Returnal and Baldurs Gate 3, so a 3rd title thrown in the mix for consideration would be nice
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNA
Steampunk said:
They said they did have ground to orbit flight, but that it didn't really add anything to the game and messed with the flow, so they decided to go with a transition cutscene to get people into the game proper, rather than have something that felt like make-work.

I guess it's one of those things that people do the first few times, and then they just skip it, and the devs would have had to include a "skip" button for all those people who wanted one anyway.
Click to expand...

Steampunk said:
I see your point, and ED could have done ship interiors, and it could have added nothing, and most players could have skipped it. At least with Starfield they've taken the idea that your ship is your home, and should have an interior.

Otherwise you've got to ask yourself why these game have hyperjumps, frameshift, etc (whatever they want to call it) to fast travel between planets and star systems? No one wants to spend hours or days just travelling from A to B in blackness with nothing happening, and so fast travel is used in most games, and most players use it instead of going the long way around every time.

It's just a game design choice likely heavily influenced by the planetary creation tech. I doubt there will be enough people who refuse to buy based on this that Bethseda is going to worry about having a dead game from this choice.
Click to expand...

Why do you need cars in GTA games, just press F and will get you to your destination! Or why do you need story, just give some pew-pew-pew! :D

Joke aside, stuff like below screenshot can make it fun to do. Not to mention it will be fun to see ships, damaged, trying to reenter atmosphere and disintegrate or at least lose some parts. Bethesda is just cutting corners, like any "mainstream" dev does.



 
Calin Banc said:
Why do you need cars in GTA games, just press F and will get you to your destination! Or why do you need story, just give some pew-pew-pew! :D

Joke aside, stuff like below screenshot can make it fun to do. Not to mention it will be fun to see ships, damaged, trying to reenter atmosphere and disintegrate or at least lose some parts. Bethesda is just cutting corners, like any "mainstream" dev does.



Click to expand...
Yea.

Even no man's sky let's u enter atmo and land yourself ish in any planet.

The more I think of Starfield, the more it seems its outerworlds 2
 
BUDFORCE said:
Yea 100%.

I'm not buying Starfield for the space flight aspect, to be honest I'm not particularly interested in that part of the game at all.
Click to expand...

Tombstone said:
Same with me on this one, I'm very interested in the mobile base building and the planetary base building and I'm interested in all the cool looking planets and exploring them/doing quests, but I'm really not interested in the space flight/combat bits of Starfield , I've got Everspace 2 for that sort of thing.
Click to expand...


Same here - Bethesda makes RPG games and I am more interested in the planetary exploration and story aspects then flying a spaceship. Also the ability to build your own outposts looks like it will be interesting too.

Having to take off and land manually,and go pew-pew in space all the time sounds tedious for an RPG game. The Mass Effect series worked perfectly well without having to do this! It's why fast travel exists in RPG games.

If anything,in reality landing and take-off would be automated. This is basically how things are done today - if the Space Shuttle had been replaced it would have had automated landing just like the Buran had.
Steampunk said:
It's just a game design choice likely heavily influenced by the planetary creation tech. I doubt there will be enough people who refuse to buy based on this that Bethseda is going to worry about having a dead game from this choice.
Click to expand...

The story,characters and planetary exploration aspects will be what makes or breaks this game.
 
Last edited:
Starfield looks much better to me after seeing this latest showcase, the previous footage was underwhelming. Dare I say that my expectations have been raised and I'm starting to get excited?
 
Last edited:
yeah really want Starfield to be a fun game first and foremost, let some of Bethsdas humour and goofiness through. Some of the other space games are so dry atm
 
Watched the deep dive, it seems like things are shaping up quite nicely. I am a little concerned about locations outside of curated spaces just being low quality procedural experiences. When I listened to Todd on the lex podcast this appeared to be something that they had considered. Whether they’ve managed to adequately solve it is another manner.

Unfortunately the release date is too close to AC6 though so this might be an early 2024 purchase for me.

Regarding the discussion about flying into atmosphere from space and landing. It was a great experience taking off in star Citizen and heading off into space. Seeing the curvature of the planet and the atmospheric haze as the sunlight bleeds round the corner. However it’s a lot of dead time and would become repetitive and boring very quickly.

When travelling through the atmosphere there is no Gameplay challenge. This isn’t ksp where you need to carefully control your vehicle inputs otherwise your craft will tumble into the ocean. You’re not navigating round thunderclouds or dealing with wind shear to ensure you land perfectly. Or considering any aerodynamic forces. It’s literally just look up (or down) and hold the accelerator. So not great from a gameplay perspective.

There is also no exploration aspect to it either. Someone compared it to driving from point a to point b. If you are driving or riding a horse you are also exploring the map/world around you. Assuming a well put together world, you would be rewarded for driving around and exploring. What are you going to explore when entering from space? The Karman line?

It adds a nice experience but at the cost of code complexity. Having a tight well polished gameplay experience is better than just adding things for the sake of it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom