Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Starfield - Epic Shit Takes from Bethestards

Latelistener

Arcane
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
2,594
I enjoy the combat, but it's either a faceroll or you get one-shot by a robot while your companion walks directly into your line of fire.
It's all fine and good, but your character is really just a flying camera.

It doesn't react to damage until the very end and if you get stunned by a grenade or something else they STILL do not have first person animations.

Camera just freezes for a few seconds. You have to switch to third person to understand what's happening. :lol:
 

ind33d

Educated
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
984
Receiving 500 credits or 3000 credits feels the same. But if quests rewarded you with a physical chest full of credsticks that were each worth 500 and you had to pick them up by hand, that might feel better psychologically. Or if certain factions paid in physical platinum or fuel rods that you had to sell afterward. I think a lot of the difference in reception between Skyrim and Starfield is because of players subconsciously not accepting fiat currency. What is a "credit" actually backed by? Does anyone even know? Meanwhile, everybody knows that gold is valuable, and you can figure out the conversion between 1gp and physical goods with minor effort.

Apparently someone else thought about this too
 

ind33d

Educated
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
984
I used the White Vladimir mod, but due to game updates, now it only changes his face. Is there some way I can de-melanate Vladimir?
 

Stella Brando

Arcane
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
9,036
Isn't Barrett a Final Fantasy character? Why is he in Bethesda~world now?

OIP-C.hrVVJj_FoLK9H9MCu4ASywHaDt
 
Last edited:

cvv

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
18,184
Location
Kingdom of Bohemia
Codex+ Now Streaming!

Honestly is a red rating deserved? Game's sitting on my shelf, I'm waiting for more patches and mods but this makes me wanna forget about it for good.

I mean as much as Todd's games are shat on I had fun with Skyrim (8/10 for me) and I even finished F3 and F4 (both 5/10 I guess). Is Starfield at least of similar average quality or is it really such an unmitigated disaster?
 

Cologno

Educated
Joined
Jan 3, 2024
Messages
256

Honestly is a red rating deserved? Game's sitting on my shelf, I'm waiting for more patches and mods but this makes me wanna forget about it for good.

I mean as much as Todd's games are shat on I had fun with Skyrim (8/10 for me) and I even finished F3 and F4 (both 5/10 I guess). Is Starfield at least of similar average quality or is it really such an unmitigated disaster?
Me, too. I liked most Bethesda games up until FO4 (which was hit and miss) Yeah, Starfield's pretty bad. Performance and such is a lot better than before, but it's just a crappy game all else considered. Just all around bad. Hell, I don't even think the modding kit is out yet. That was their biggest sin - that puppy should've shoved out the door to the community day 1 or soon after.
 

TheDarkUrge

Educated
Joined
Aug 21, 2023
Messages
116

Honestly is a red rating deserved? Game's sitting on my shelf, I'm waiting for more patches and mods but this makes me wanna forget about it for good.

I mean as much as Todd's games are shat on I had fun with Skyrim (8/10 for me) and I even finished F3 and F4 (both 5/10 I guess). Is Starfield at least of similar average quality or is it really such an unmitigated disaster?
It feels like shovelware. There is literally nothing going for it. It's extraordinarily average in all respects and just feels boring to play, I can usually find positive things to praise in most RPGs. I finished skyrim and enjoyed it even if I liked oblivion and morrowind way more, but starfield I just can't find anything enjoyable about it. If the combat was good Starfields shortcomings might be forgivable but unlike bethesda's fallouts it has no VATS and the story/world doesnt make up for it so it's just really trash to play. So many better shooters out there, and there's no roleplaying to speak of. Between the loading screens and lack of anything interesting to do it might as well be never installed. I feel bad for wasting ~10 hours of my life giving it a try and I just pirated it, so my opinion doesnt even have the added sting about spending money on trash.. :killit:
 

ERYFKRAD

Barbarian
Patron
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
28,370
Strap Yourselves In Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth

Cologno

Educated
Joined
Jan 3, 2024
Messages
256
For those who played Oblivion and Skyrim: what did Skyrim actually add to the series? Mechanics/gameplay wise.
Add? Assuming this isn't sarcasm, the game streamlined so much from the previous games it actually subtracted. Races don't mean jack, no classes, magic particularly offensive magic is just a variation of the same spell, melee is decent at times but bouts turns into a low-grade stamina game of management.

It's a great game to explore around and muck around in, but meh otherwise.
 

Child of Malkav

Erudite
Joined
Feb 11, 2018
Messages
2,582
Location
Romania
Add? Assuming this isn't sarcasm, the game streamlined so much from the previous games it actually subtracted. Races don't mean jack, no classes, magic particularly offensive magic is just a variation of the same spell, melee is decent at times but bouts turns into a low-grade stamina game of management.
So Oblivion is mechanically richer then? Ok, thanks.
 

Butter

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
7,697
Skyrim added dual wielding, for both weapons and spells (you can't dual wield shields though, ghey). It added perk trees instead of Oblivion's automatic perks every 25 points in each skill. It's not a lot, and it doesn't compensate for all that was removed/streamlined, but it's something.
 

ind33d

Educated
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
984
Still no creation kit, im starting to think bethesda really abandoned this PoS or are they waiting for releasing some crap DLC and release CK at the same time.
I heard that Gubb Mint wants to make access to the creation kit invite-only so nobody creates any badwrongthink mods like "Maybe New Atlantis shouldn't be 100% populated by Australian Aboriginals" or "Add back the redheads from the concept art"

Also, I think Starfield should have been limited to fake 3D like Doom 1 or low poly like Morrowind to make the random generation easier. Full 3D and modern graphics make populating an entire universe impossible, and they didn't even include VR support, so it's not like it's future-proof
 
Last edited:

Zed Duke of Banville

Dungeon Master
Patron
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
11,921
Honestly is a red rating deserved? Game's sitting on my shelf, I'm waiting for more patches and mods but this makes me wanna forget about it for good.

I mean as much as Todd's games are shat on I had fun with Skyrim (8/10 for me) and I even finished F3 and F4 (both 5/10 I guess). Is Starfield at least of similar average quality or is it really such an unmitigated disaster?
Starfield is the Open World space RPG that isn't Open World (you can wander around barren procedurally-generated zones with at most a few types of alien creatures), is more of a looter-shooter than an RPG, and isn't much of a space game (not much to space other than combat, and the space combat is worse than that found in Spacebourne, which was created by a single person). Even leaving that aside, Bethesda's designers, programmers, and writers seem to be substantially less competent than the teams that created Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Skyrim, much less Morrowind. Disappointment in the context of Bethesda's earlier games is probably driving much of the negativity of the general audience.
 

mediocrepoet

Philosoraptor in Residence
Patron
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
11,954
Location
Combatfag: Gold box / Pathfinder
Codex 2012 Codex+ Now Streaming! MCA Project: Eternity Divinity: Original Sin 2
Starfield ... is more of a looter-shooter than an RPG,

I've never really understood why people describe Starfield as a looter shooter. Looter shooters have more loot, some of it's actually interesting, and the gameplay loop is tighter and more satisfying. If it's a looter shooter at all, it's a pretty piss poor one.
 

Drowed

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
1,679
Location
Core City
The thing with Bethesda games is that their strength - if you can even call it a strength - was their gameplay loop. As Todd himself used to say, "you see that mountain, you can go there", and you would find various random events, enemies, or dungeons along the way. Bethesda's post-Morrowind games are a perfect example of theme park design, you have a new toy every ten steps. These games are perfect for people who were either born with an attention deficit or are intentionally looking to play something without using their brain.

And this may sound like criticism here but it really isn't. Skyrim is the perfect example of the formula that Bethesda has managed to come up with after years of refinement, it's not by chance that it was released and re-released so many times. You open the game, pick a random direction, and just go. Things happen around you, you talk to NPCs, but everything is really vague and secondary. Nothing is really of much importance, the exploration itself is what matters. You can stop playing at any point and come back at any point exactly because the in-game events are irrelevant, you are stuck in the loop of exploring, killing enemies, collecting items, and going back to exploring.

But then in Starfield they decided that you no longer have a single big world to explore, which causes the first break in the loop. Now you have to go through 3 loading screens to go from one place to another. But unlike what happened in previous games, you don't find several different random things along the way - it's quite the opposite, you follow a whole path to find a single random thing. Essentially, they managed to break the only vaguely interesting thing that existed in their formula. And without it, you are left with having to interact with the rest of the game: the story, the dialogue, and the gameplay. And this is where you see that the king is naked. He always was, but now you can't help but look.
 

ind33d

Educated
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
984
The thing with Bethesda games is that their strength - if you can even call it a strength - was their gameplay loop. As Todd himself used to say, "you see that mountain, you can go there", and you would find various random events, enemies, or dungeons along the way. Bethesda's post-Morrowind games are a perfect example of theme park design, you have a new toy every ten steps. These games are perfect for people who were either born with an attention deficit or are intentionally looking to play something without using their brain.

And this may sound like criticism here but it really isn't. Skyrim is the perfect example of the formula that Bethesda has managed to come up with after years of refinement, it's not by chance that it was released and re-released so many times. You open the game, pick a random direction, and just go. Things happen around you, you talk to NPCs, but everything is really vague and secondary. Nothing is really of much importance, the exploration itself is what matters. You can stop playing at any point and come back at any point exactly because the in-game events are irrelevant, you are stuck in the loop of exploring, killing enemies, collecting items, and going back to exploring.

But then in Starfield they decided that you no longer have a single big world to explore, which causes the first break in the loop. Now you have to go through 3 loading screens to go from one place to another. But unlike what happened in previous games, you don't find several different random things along the way - it's quite the opposite, you follow a whole path to find a single random thing. Essentially, they managed to break the only vaguely interesting thing that existed in their formula. And without it, you are left with having to interact with the rest of the game: the story, the dialogue, and the gameplay. And this is where you see that the king is naked. He always was, but now you can't help but look.
The best moment I had in SF was having to retreat from the Mantis lair because I was out of ammo, then going back to beat it after leveling up a few times. Starfield just needs a Diablo 3 Rift on one or two planets per system
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom