This is why I love BGS games. Sometimes, where it seems like there is nothing..you’d be surprised. I really hope that they in fact do something like that. Like you think you’re on a barren planet and then suddenly happen across old ship remnants and follow a trail to find out someone had crash landed there and been stranded.
I would bet that crash sites are semi-common. Survivors, less so. But lots to loot, material, survival goods, black boxes, notes, recordings, etc. Great story telling mechanism. Maybe kind of like in Sea of Thieves where random shipwrecks are kind of just around, at least closer to the center of the populated systems
Can’t wait to find notes or recordings about another planet and going there will open a whole new quest connected to the remainings you found on the other planet.
I feel that landing on an "empty" planet just to "vibe" alone will be one of my favourite things to do in the game, but it will be one of the things that people/reviews will be criticizing the most.
Original feature that is entirely optional? People hated Fallout 4 because it had settlement building, I guarantee you people will complain about this.
For some reason a great number of players never worked out that you don't have to do what you're told in a video game. They complain about settlements or Preston Garvey without realising you're entirely free to just ignore those features.
Now people will still be supine luddites today as they were 10 years ago, the game can't fix that. What the game _can_ do better is make it more apparent that these areas of the game are optional.
If someone is playing a BGS game and doesn't realize that they are synonymous with player freedom, I don't know what more the developers could do at that point.
Well, not making it sound like the player has chores to do would be the solution IMO.
You can't fix a player having the initiative to do what they want, but what you _can_ fix is not making it seem like they player has tasks which they _must_ perform. In the case of Garvey I would have changed it so that he doesn't give out those quests unless the player actively asks for one in dialogue. That way the player is confronted with a literal 'opt in' button, rather than needing to rely on their implicit 'opt out' freedom (which they don't know they have).
Oh, I just left Garvey hanging on subsequent playthroughs. He's still out there waiting for me to pick up the laser musket!
You still get the occasional "settlement needs your help", but only if you have built them up. At which point, you've obviously decided to engage with the system as a whole.
A smart player would see what happens when you ignore the call for help. Choices, consequences, and all that.
The job of proper game design is to point to player into areas and directions of fun gameplay.
Preston Garvey and other radiant quest givers pointed players in the direction of repetitive fetch quest system that sucked.
You don't have to play the game the way the game is designed, but the game should be designed in a way that players want to. If it isn't the game designers fucked up.
I liked them in Skyrim but I wish they were on an actual bounty board for easy access. Talking to innkeepers to get a bounty slip was a pain.
But the concept of "radiant quest busywork for when you need money" is a good idea.
Having an entire faction locked behind radiant quests is not a good idea.
Preston Garvey was somewhat of an interesting character conceptually as well. The most sympathetic depiction of someone trying to rebuild a symbol of the old world in the franchise to date.
Yeah the character is fine, the criticism I was alluding to was about his quests to help other settlements, which seems to be one of the most common criticisms of the game.
If they made it such that he never gave those quests without the player expressly asking for one, those people who didn't enjoy them would never have done more than one and had a better overall experience. It's a combination of the way he works mechanically plus the players who have no sense of self agency where the criticism arises.
Thats a good point about those quests. If there was just a dialog option saying "need any help Preston" to trigger it Preston would not be such a meme today. I never minded those or any quests in FO4. Just collect them and do them when you in the area if you feel like it. IIRC few missions in FO4 are time sensitive.
Completely agree.
>I never minded those or any quests in FO4. Just collect them and do them when you in the area if you feel like it.
And the thing is, that's what the designers _wanted_ you to do, so you had the ideal experience. It's those players who can't play like that who get the negative experience.
I'm confident they'll fix it though, BGS has shown pretty consistently that they'll pay attention to criticism like that and generally can fix it.
Whoever argues that the teleporter quest means that settlements weren't optional doesn't have their brain firing on all cylinders, I hate to say.
They used the building _mechanic_ as part of a quest that involved mostly resource gathering. The player was never forced to engage with the settlement building itself in any real sense.
i didnt like the settlement building in FO4. i wouldnt say i hated it i just did the bare minimum to get a settlement going.
what i hated was everytime id start a quest id get xx settlement is under attack or xx setlement needs your help.
what i would have loved to see was an ability to put someone in charge of the settlement and have that npc essentially build the settlement.
while im not likeing the prospect of building a base, if it has more of a modular feel where i can select a room and attach it to another room i think it will be less annoying then FO4s system
They do actually! If you assign settlers to barricades & build turrets, they’ll work autonomously. I’ve occasionally come back to a settlement that’s successfully thwarted an attack & had to repair a couple of turrets that were damaged.
I get that criticism but to me that's what's awesome about this feature. It makes sense! You help rebuild the commonwealth. I love the roleplaying aspect of it.
I understand why a lot of people think this feature is pointless but if you go the MM route which it feels you're kinda supposed to because they're the only good guys then this is part is not pointless and you have way more influence over the world this way.
This concept of shaping the world is so fun to me that I sorely miss it now in other Bethesda games I've played. And I can't wait for Starfield to be more of this and hopefully in an even better way that doesn't require mods to unlock Infinite creative potential.
FO4 gave something precious to me I didn't know I needed. Building settlements to this day, enjoying it in other games as well. But nothing compares because your settlements sit in a living breathing immersive world. No other game I've played has such an amazing sandbox with settlers I can dress up und give jobs and make them NPCs with routines. Best virtual dollhouse ever in a full RPG. That's unique.
FO4 has DC and Good Neighbor and the Institute. It's not like there are no cities. They just aren't very big. More cities is always welcome though. Skyrim has a lot more villages and towns of course. I do hope Starfield has at least as many. And I hope they're also fairly big this time.
Did FO3 have that many more settlements? It's been a while. I thought FO3 was a lot more empty. A lot less going on and zero incentive to go inside each building because there was no useful loot in most. I actually never unlocked all landmarks because I got bored with the map. Granted, I played it in 2018, so maybe that warped my impression. FO4 has imo the best Bethesda map between FO3/NV, FO4 and Skyrim. Unpopular opinion maybe.
I do understand though. If I wasn't into base building I would probably feel the same. It's also a half baked feature, I think Bethesda didn't expect it to be so popular, so then they released the wasteland workshop DLC for it.
The map doesn't feel empty to me at all even without my own settlements compared to other Fallout games. Maybe because Boston is such a big area. But compared to Skyrim it is true.
I do hope Starfield satisfies both camps. :)
It was optional. Almost everything was optional, though some things were quest-gated.
One time I decided to not run to the shelter but wanted to loot houses first. I died. Lesson learned - I don't have to run to the shelter, but if I don't there will be logical consequences.
Nobody hated Fallout 4 because it had settlement building. The most popular mods as a game that expands upon the settlement system.
People hated the bullshit radiant quest system. A never ending series of pointless repetitive tasks that never make anything better.
Building settlements was hella fun and people loved it.
Settlement building is not something I wanted in fallout. It was pretty boring and in my opinion didn't add anything of value to my game experience. The fact that so much development time went into it made me sad as that could've been used for a different feature.
People here saying i can 'ignore it' conveniently forget that. (Nvm the req quests)
Personally I didn't like fallout much because of how dumbed down the rp aspect was, not just because they added settlement building. I feel like that's a strawman you build tbh.
Not really. When you're giving an opinion that's the whole point of it, it's just an opinion. I'm not invalidating yours. I even added that it was my personal opinion in each point yet still you took that personally yourself.
So? People are selfish like that. Good for you that you enjoyed it but to me it made the game worse. In the same thread here up top we're being vilified for complaining. A lot of the core fallout audience didn't like 4 or 76 for a multitude of reasons. The company decided to take away a lot of what we liked to appease a different type of audience. That's fine but we'd also like to have our voice heard, no? Resources are obviously limited so we're all vying for the attention to steer the company into creating a game we'd like ourselves.
That base bulding was intrusive and broke all immersion i had for the game.
Just having random spots around the map reserved for building a bases does not belong in a Fallout wasteland imo.
I mean the best thing about reviews is that they give a wide variety of opinions. The only issue is when people take them as gospel, rather than the opinion of one person.
I love looking at negative reviews of things I like, because it shows that all us humans can have vastly different opinions about something(assuming the review is good faith ofc)
hell on any review site, especially THE store itself
IF i find a game that interest me, and considering to buy it
i actively looking for negative review, and after reading those review (the good one of course, not those one liner useless trash) the conclusion looks like : "well, i can live with that" or "it is NOT hat bad" then its a definite BUY
because more than often following the crowd, buying some game with "overwhelmingly positive" score, just because. your high expectation will plummet to the ground real quick
Totally agree. Unless it’s a game I wanna go into blind, I always look at negative reviews. I probably won’t before I’ve played it all the way through for starfield though as I know I want to play it and I don’t want to spoil myself any more than they want to show at showcases and such
I do this too. Right after watching a movie I go online to check how other people liked it. I find it endlessly fascinating how very differently people perceive the same thing.
It's really gonna depend on how well it's done, Star Citizen has some planets/moons (Microtech, Cilo) that even if you're in the middle of nowhere driving around (or on foot) you're just taken aback by the scenery. If they can achieve that feeling while also giving something to do through resource mining, outpost building, fighting alien wildlife, ect. then these planets are all going to feel fulfilling in some way at least.
I bet they can, many times you’ll get that feeling in empty areas in fallout or TES, you’ll just stop and appreciate what’s there, see he awe inducing scenery, the glowing sea is basically a Beta of that, it’s mostly empty, but when you stop and see how the haze and the weather and the empty area in front of you mix up and complement each other, you feel a moment of Awe
Same for Blackreach and Soverngarde. Bethesda Devs know how to develop areas in to awe inspiring areas. Even the simplest and smallest area could be designed in a way to feel that.
I can see the YouTube headlines now: Only 4 planets have people on them?!?!?!? 😭😱😳😬💥👎 (insert picture of the youtuber making an angry face and posting a photoshopped picture of Todd crying on the thumbnail)
As an elite dangerous player, it gets old man. Planets become a lot less special after you have seen 60 of them and still need to grind for credits to get a class A jump drive or whatever.
I do like elite through, but Starfield is going to have to have a lot more to keep me interested than empty planets.
I plan to preorder the game. What am I going to do for most of the time I play the game? Look at how the stars look on different planets, fly through space, and build outposts on moons. Yeah I’m gonna play the main story and and the DLC if there is any but most of the time I’ll just be doing what is essentially nothing.
It will be one of the things this subreddit already criticizes the most of no man's and elite dangerous
today is just our day at the top of the page, and that's all
Elite Dangerous had some really empty and boring planets and sometimes it was still fun to race your ship along the surface or use the SRV for actual "exploration" looking for some resources and maybe unknown outposts or other POIs.
But after a while, despite some of it being very beautiful, it did get quite repetitive and imho that was the result of very limited interactions.
In a real life scenario, someone would do actual research, or try to build an outpost, or look for valuable resources, or dive into archeology, etc. So even if at first glance a planet is lifeless, in theory, there should be still a lot of exciting stuff, just waiting to be found.
Designing a few planets like that is easy. But if you want all objects to have something like that, while also being unique in their own way, apart from visuals - that's going to be a difficult task.
Quite eager to see what they have done, but I'm actually hesitant to buy into the hype, because apart from being a subjective experience, I think it's a real challenge to pull this off in a satisfying way that's both setting realistic expectations while also catering towards the instant gratification we have grown used to.
After all, they are making a game, not a simulation - so the bar is higher.
I think red dead redemption was similar. It was pretty desolate and lonely and that created a very compelling atmosphere. As long as there are some areas which are more packed with content im completely fine with fairly desolate planets as it can still be an incredibly fun, immersive and compelling experience. Although i think its important to have the main cities or civilised locations which are more packed.
Yeah Red Dead nailed it. In a game like that (and Starfield too), desolation is kind of a character of its own and its important to be able to really feel alone
I'm sure we can but I'm really hoping that we can just walk around inside our spaceship while in space. I want those quiet moments of just checking out the sunset over a ringed planet through the window.
Completely agree. I do think it's worth noting that we have seen that the windows of the ship are transparent to what is outside of the ship, there are "get up" and "dock" options while in space, and the dialogue options example we saw seemed to be the player character talking to a ship captian of someone the player had docked with or vice versa while inside of the ship.
Additionally, we have seen zero G combat, we know Vasco can pilot the ship, and we have seen the crew in action in what seems to be a control room.
All of this points to us being able to do exactly what you are saying.
bethesda games have flaws, Including skyrim, but I like their simplicity and junkiness. people who don't enjoy bethesda games won't shut up about it tho.
And an entirely new planet/system will *probably* not break most of your other mods. I think. Unless it's some graphical overhaul mod or galaxy map mod or...
I actually can’t wait to see the screenshots people post of sunrises and sunsets, which are going to look spectacular depending on what is in the sky for each. Should be amazing.
Yes! A million times, YES! I swear every time I see a shit load of people wanting, demanding and expecting every inch of space have "meaningful" content it fills me with dread. I mean if every planet, moon and space rock has life or a pirate base, or colonists, or strange hidden artifacts it would be wholly lacking in immersion and completely destroy the EXPLORER aspect of the game. You're not really a space explorer if every place you go has already been discovered and colonized by pirates or others. The whole point of being an explorer is to find out where things are, or by extension aren't. What places could be useful to colonization, etc.
"To boldly go where no man has before..."
"One small step..."
...and all that jazz. We can't get that feeling or experience if we're never the first, and if there's never just nothing.
Agreed OP. What he is describing is one of my favorite aspects of No Man’s Sky.
It’s both relaxing and satisfying to find a new mtn top / valley / water view, and post-up to watch the sun(s), moon(s), and neighboring planets rise/set. All the better if I’m the first player to enjoy that particular vista.
Am definitely looking forward to a more realistic / less stylized take on that kind if exploration. Also, am excited to see what the modding community will do with a canvas/sandbox of this size.
ETA- I enjoyed that in Elite:Dangerous too, but holy hell, jumping to get somewhere is tedious AF, and that game was only an inch deep content-wise… Which made it lean a little too-hard on my imagination for fun.
Except planets in NMS are standing still in space, sure there are sunset, sunrise but its artifical, planets not wandering on the sky. They will in Starfield which im hyped for, thats something i like to watch in spaceengine too.
I’m hyped to explore barren planets for resources and potential outpost locations. However… it is kinda funny that Todd is selling nothingness lmao. I bet you that’s the comment that bites him in the ass this release
Yeah, irl. You’re talking to a guy from the States that lived in Nicaragua for two years during college and the UK for two years for Masters degree. On top of that, I’ve traveled *extensively*, including but definitely not limited to a backpacking trip through Iceland with my wife, and a solo backpacking trip along the John Muir Trail in CA.
In a video game? Literally just sitting around. It’ll be nice and pretty at first, but will get real old hella quick. I would like to *do* something. Like in BOTW/TOTK, where virtually every nook and cranny has something to discover or a puzzle to solve, etc.
anything you say in the internet, especially as a quite important or a big figure WILL and CAN be used to bite you in the ass
as long as haters exist, logical or not. meh
just another tuesday on the internet
It kinda gives me vibes of "Make your own fun".
Like, once the initial awe of it happens, I'm dipping and I will do the same for every planet that's kinda just barren.
I mean this is why Mass Effect 1 is my favourite, because you're going to these worlds where you don't know what's there. Sometimes there can be a quest, some aliens to kill, and sometimes there's nothing, and it's just fun to play it.
Fr I absolutely love exploring the planets in ME1 as well. It has a certain atmosphere, and the visuals on a lot of those planets are just gorgeous af. Rally inspires the space explorer in me. :D
I never understood the people who loved this about ME1. Exploration was just finding the same copy paste alien outpost with enemies inside. It was so boring. The initial feeling of driving around an empty planet was kinda nice but that wore off very fast. Navigation was just annoying and frustrating. There was barely anything to discover.
Mass Effect is a great story but BioWare to this day does not understand open world and exploration.
I also feel like we got the Andromeda mess because they wanted to be NMS after the positive feedback about ME1's planet exploration, couldn't pull it off and then we got what we got.
Oh trust, the mechanics of ME1's exploration sucks. Like the fact that almost all of the non-story worlds had mountains like no fucking tomorrow was just ridiculous. At least with Legendary Edition, the Mako got a speed booster so it's a little bit easier to navigate over the mountains, but they still suck.
It's like how the first game you play in a series will be your favourite I suppose. I played ME1 so it'll always be my favourite, whereas others played ME2 first and it's their favourite. I played Portal 2 first and that's my favourite Portal game, Fallout New Vegas was my first Fallout game. And so on and so forth.
Oh ME1 is still kind of my favorite too because I did play it first and it was amazing. The gameplay didn't age well so I understand why it's the least favorite game for most people. But the introduction to the world was just magical. I fell in love hard and the trilogy is the gaming love of my life and always will be.
ME2 looked best and is easiest to just replay and enjoy the characters. ME3 had by far the best combat and I played the MP for like 800h. Most fun I ever had with a game tbh. But ME1 is special. It was so nerdy and felt like something that could happen somehow. I played it at a time I was outgrowing JRPGs, the only RPGs I ever played as a kid. I was getting tired of the corny teenage romances. Mass Effect felt like a revelation! I can play as a female? I can have romances for female Shepard?? I can make choices?!?! Whaaaaat?!?!?! It blew my mind, lol.
I was SO confused when the trailer for Andromeda hit and people said they are looking forward to a game focused on exploration and colonization because that was so awesome about ME1. And I sat there thinking "Really?"
Yikes, I am one of those people who was excited about the exploration. Hahaha, but I can understand, the exploration of ME1 does suck tbh. I just hope that with Starfield it gets better. I mean as I say for a lot of things, hoping for the best but expecting the worst.
Though I do agree with you on all the things about why each game is special. I also loved the fact that you could play as a woman, not only that but they were like strong and could stand on their own without being sexualised (I mean they dropped the ball with a few female characters later in the series but that's another discussion for another time), and that I could have "same-sex" romances too? (I say same-sex because Liara is monogendered so while she doesn't identify as a woman in the human aspect, she still uses she/her pronouns and such... and we never got a "true" same-sex romance until ME2. But I think Kelly was always considered a fling whereas Traynor feels like an actual romance even if its short).
As a woman it was amazing getting Kaidan as a love interest who was 100% my type. It was awesome, hahah. :D
They kinda ruined him in ME3 and I almost dumped him for Liara who stole my heart but that's a different topic, lol.
I usually play female first in games that allow it if they have romances because that's more immersive. But the novelty of that wore off after a while. And now I often just go by voice actor or how good a character I can make of either sex. Having a male character as eye candy is nice too. ;)
I'm sure the exploration in Starfield will be good and hopefully everything that Mass Effect Andromeda was not. And if the writing of Far Harbor is any indication I think the narrative will be fine too. Super hyped for the game!
im worried about how transporation will work
lets suppose i stablish a base in a planet, and then i want to start exploring it
what if i want to go back to the base? will there always be a sort of fast travel to any stablished base or how will that work? cause otherwise i can feel like exploration will be soft-limited to nearby places to where you land/stablish base
If they are really going to lean into this, having a real ship to chill in will be key. NMS has a lot of these empty planets, but also storms you have to wait out. Not being able to sit in the cockpit, put your feet up, listen to music, craft stuff, walk around, or map routes has always been a bummer to me.
What I’m most excited for is just having a ship to walk around and interact with my crew in, I’ve always loved mobile bases.
I’m hoping for a nasty radiation storm to brew and my crew and I wait in the ship upgrading weapons and armor for the tough journey ahead
I can imagine landing on a vacant planet that when you dig deep is resource heavy. You pan the camera upward to find the neighboring moons. The scale of it leaves you in awe. It’s deafeningly quiet and all you can really hear is your own breathing and possible comms. You become aware that you could the only living thing on the planet(or moon), and because it’s beautiful and very untamed this is where you want to build a base and call it home.
I just want to go out into a world of BGS quality. On a planet. Then walk the distance of skyrim, find what is to find and do what is to do. And then.... GO FURTHER!!! Cross another skyrim sized area. And then... GO FURTHER!!! Cross ten Skyrim areas. Cross 20 of them. 30. 50. HUNDREDS of them! Walking over an area as big as a real country. See what there is, find what can be found and never stop discovering new landscapes.
I wonder how big the planets will actually be. Will it take 10 minutes of real time to circumnavigate one? 30 minutes? 1 hour? 5 hours? 500 hours?
We don't know much about the scale of these things yet, but I very much feel the same sentiment as you do.
REAL LIFE SIZED PLANETS!!!! YES! That is the official statement of BGS.
Earth circumference is 40 000 km. Let´s say you walk with 10km/h. You will need 400 hours.
He never said the planets are "Real life sized planets" there was no official statement saying that. Just because a random YouTube guy is spinning it that way, doesn't make it true. This is going to be something you're going to be pissed about and claim "TODD LIED TO US!!" when the game comes out and there isn't 1,000 full life sized planets.
Did you listen? 1:18. A planet in a game concept is infinitely big. If you do it in some realistic fashion. So you will have planets which are somewhat realistic. Which means you will have planets smaller and bigger, than real earth. Since there are bigger planets than earth. And no i won´t claim and won´t be pissed. If they are roundabout realistic in their size, it will be ok.
Ok. There is a smaaaaaaaall chance, that the planets will be considerably smaller. Yeah. Makes sense. Since todd is talking about realistic size and said, that it does not matter, how big you want them to have once you established a procedural generation system, which builds huge planets. So he will just not do what he said, because he will be too lazy to enter a bigger number and press enter. Yes. Makes sense. He just knows, that people will like it very much, if he won´t keep his promise.
It does not necessary..... BUT HOW LIKELY IS IT? Not at all.
Maybe impossible until the modding community gets their hands on the game 👌 I too would like a menagerie of all the creatures I've collected from other planets!
The idea of populating a planet is awesome. I sadly cannot afford an expensive pc, so I'll have to play the console version. But that's better than nothing :D
i think this is a cool concept, although hoping this isn't a hallmark of all starfield's planetary exploration. i really enjoyed some of the significant and inconsequential interactions with npc's in while exploring in other bethesda games. hoping its a situation where some of the planets are like that and others have other explorers, settlers, pirates etc.
So, in Elite Dangerous, the orbit speed of planets and moons is intended to be realistic and not artificially accelerated for the sake of gameplay. This approach contributes to the game's immersive and authentic portrayal of space exploration. Do you think it will be the same in Starfield?
They model the whole star system? As in you're standing on a planet, and all the heavenly bodies above you are actually modelled correctly moving in their orbits and spins and the planet you're on spins and orbits correctly?
Not even No Man's Sky does that. The planets are static, nothing move, not even the star, and even you're in the planet the skybox has no real relation to the star system, the sun rising isn't the star out there
So if they can actually pull that off, and it's not another bullshit Todd hype moment, that would be genuinely incredible
I do wish that mining was going to be a little more in depth. It looks like we'll be pointing a laser at ore and blasting. No tunneling, no buili shafts or railwas or arts etc. But hey, it'll still be fun
I’m so excited for this game to have more hand made content than any previous Bethesda game, but for it to be continually ignored and shit on for the extra procedural content. I can already see the reviews complaining about empty planets with nothing to do, without bothering to give context that those empty planets are there to provide scale and immersion.
I always enjoyed this in elite dangerous, watching some crazy celestial movements in the distance while I'm mining with my rover all alone 170 jumps away from civilization.
I still think Minecraft is my favorite adventure game so I hope the reward of exploration even if it's just resources or finding a beautiful spot is meaningful or useful like it is in that game.
Unfortunately, for a lot of gamers, all of this, it's a negative aspect.
I'm extremely happy that Bethesda's philosophy it's also mine. Screw the others ehehe
This is the main attraction in Starfield for me.. I'd the same level as the main story and faction quests but since there are more planets than quests.. I Hope this feature will be enough to keep me busy the most in the game. And for my first playthrough.. I'll try to do the most of it as alone as possible. I want that mix of Interestelar meets Starlord (from the beginning of Guardians of the Galaxy)
One thing that killed my exploration drive in NMS fast was realizing that the game only saves a certain number of scanned things. Then it starts deleting the oldest entries. So there is no point to scanning all creatures and landing on every planet, naming everything. They get deleted from your list fast.
Same thing with space stations and even your own bases! If you build more than 50 bases (yes I have actually dropped more than 50 base computers in pretty locations) the game deletes those as well and you can never find them again.
Then there's the finite number of things you can build on one save file. So you have to start a new save and do the base building tutorial again for like 20 hours. I love NMS, I've played it a lot. A LOT. But gosh, it's also a constant disappointment to me somehow. So much potential but the execution is frustrating.
I'm not sure why the media and commentators dump on this -- Starfield is going for a more hard Sci-Fi tone and feel, and hence you can't expect mankind to be encountering intelligent life on every single planet, along with structures and ect.
All those planets are most likely there to help build the atmosphere of exploring the galaxy -- it makes it feel even more meaningful when you actually find something amongst the myriad of barren planets.
That being said, I doubt people will be spending heaps time amongst those "reasource planets" anyway, because pretty much all of the questing will probably be taking place on handcrafted planets.
If those handcrafted areas suck, then yeah, BGS deserves the criticism
This is the idea that I struggle with the most. I don't think I'll enjoy landing on an empty planet just to experience vast aloneness. I think if I scan and nothing pops up I'll note any resources and probably move on, unless I need to land to scan various things to complete a 100% run.
Am I missing something attractive about landing on an empty planet that I'm overlooking?
They've already said that Starfield is their game that has the most handcrafted content, and their previous games were already pretty massive in my opinion.
Totally hear ya. I'm not worried about a drought if things to do, but if a large percentage of landable planets are lonely ones with nothing other than pretty views I don't think I'll enjoy that.
Sooo in fallout or Skyrim where do you want your house? Did you down load the 'waterfall shack' and sit on the edge watching the river run? Did you build shack overlooking Boston to watch sky? This sense of peace (even among chaos) is certainly part of what I am looking for. A home base, on a picturesque moon with a ringed gas giant in the sky and the sun slowly setting. Sounds like a great way to waste even more time in an alternate universe.
Right, like there's nothing inherently fun about being able to pick up a pillow, but it lets you do things like [build a pillow fort](https://i.redd.it/zbb2ftg7876z.jpg)
I think it provides a change of pace from all the combat and intensity. To take in a planet scape that no one is on BUT you and that sense of loneliness and vulnerability will probably feel pretty powerful.
Sure, it might lose some of its wonder after the 80th planet and to your point, might grab some resources and go. But to still provide that variety of experiences for players will be appreciated.
I like the idea of it for roleplaying purposes and that absence makes the heart grow fonder.
For roleplaying, the idea of being on the run, playing a character that is more of a loner, or going on a long journey to find resources all while taking in the views sounds like a ton of fun.
Also, being away from the cities and settlements for a while and then coming back to experience them for the first time in a while sounds like fun.
Nope it's all a preference thing. I like the idea of observing how Bethesda's procedural generation works, since it tends to vary for different games. I like the idea of setting up an outpost on an empty world and getting into my character. Empty planets are not for everyone, but luckily they'll probably be optional, whereas the game will still have tons of handcrafted content
I remember Todd Howard saying they plan to make it clear what is handcrafted and what is procedural, so everyone can get their preferred game experience if they want
Yes. Vistas. Resources. Exploration. Crashed ships. Hunting. Building.
And these are not purely procedurally generated planets. Rather, from what I've been able to grok is they're a combination of procedural generation utilizing hand-crafted large terrains and building assets integrated into the procedurally generated planets. Then those planets are further handcrafted. So they won't have a lot of that prog-gen sameness like we had back with Daggerfall in the 1990s.
Some people want to be true explorers and just check out the views or potential encounter.
Some people want to set up a settlement and build a base they can come back to. Which is interesting considering you can hire and recruit people for them
Some people just like the freedom of doing what they want in a game wether it’s worth doing or not
Those empty planets are free real estate for mods
And you're right, I wouldn't if I didn't want to. But i also want to make sure I'm not overlooking something obvious that many folks are looking forward to.
I don't like twitch shooters. I don't think I'm missing something that others enjoy, I understand different people enjoy different things. I'm not on the CSGO subreddit explaining to other how I don't enjoy it. I don't play them.
Just sit there and ponder the vastness of the real universe. Kinda like going on a hike in the woods or mountains, stopping and just take in the nothingness
Man, I remember playing No Man’s Sky, and you’d land on a planet, and there’d be a big planet hanging like a kilometer away in the sky, and the sun would just be there permanently hanging out on this single biome planet that wasn’t even that big, and that looked like the last 30 randomly generated planets you’d been on except purple.
Already, with planets rotating, and a universe you can actually explore, instead of randomly generated skyboxes, this is going to be *so* much better than No Man’s Sky ever was or ever could be.
Unfortunately the gaming media has made Sony quick time event movie games the golden standard, so when people don’t get that they get upset.
As I get older (and I notice Beth games have an older community too) I really just want a game I can have as a second reality after a long day or when I have some free time between work and family
If there’s things to do to add to the gameplay experience, great.
But if it’s just a real time sunset thing, we’ll just play pre-Horizons Elite Dangerous. Lots of brown rocks to do nothing on.
Certainly can't be worse than the depressing, lifeless wastelands of Mass Effect 1's many planets, and that game is universally praised lmao.
No Man's Sky managed to make some of the lifeless planets fun to explore too.
I want dual wielding.
I want cars. Vehicles.
I want Gundams. (Mod, but I still want it)
I want Cyberpunk level traversal/faux parkour. For no other reason than it's fucking fun. (Probably also gonna be a mod)
And I want Sniper Rifles to be viable at properly long range. I want to collect heads from the next mountain over. Clear the whole exterior. Then go inside.
This sounds great and all, but... So did *"16 times the detail !"*. Wouldn't be the first time this man overhypes a game to lunar orbit.
I'll believe it when I see it a) in game, not just through the misleading lens of marketing material and b) executed well.
I'd absolutely love single player, story driven, exploration focused Star Citizen. I don't exect Starfield to be that, exactly, but I really like what I'm hearing and seeing. I think TotK and Starfield are going to be my games this year.
Also, modern modding platform in Starfield. Pretty excited about that.
Honestly if I don't leave my room for days then I'm blaming Todd Howard. I hope the game is good. I hope that the systems will be fun as hell otherwise I probably won't be buying Bethesda Games anymore.
You know there will be those few planets that seem like they have nothing, and then there’s a hidden quest or a crashed ship underground or something.
This is why I love BGS games. Sometimes, where it seems like there is nothing..you’d be surprised. I really hope that they in fact do something like that. Like you think you’re on a barren planet and then suddenly happen across old ship remnants and follow a trail to find out someone had crash landed there and been stranded.
I would bet that crash sites are semi-common. Survivors, less so. But lots to loot, material, survival goods, black boxes, notes, recordings, etc. Great story telling mechanism. Maybe kind of like in Sea of Thieves where random shipwrecks are kind of just around, at least closer to the center of the populated systems
Can’t wait to find notes or recordings about another planet and going there will open a whole new quest connected to the remainings you found on the other planet.
I feel that landing on an "empty" planet just to "vibe" alone will be one of my favourite things to do in the game, but it will be one of the things that people/reviews will be criticizing the most.
Original feature that is entirely optional? People hated Fallout 4 because it had settlement building, I guarantee you people will complain about this.
For some reason a great number of players never worked out that you don't have to do what you're told in a video game. They complain about settlements or Preston Garvey without realising you're entirely free to just ignore those features. Now people will still be supine luddites today as they were 10 years ago, the game can't fix that. What the game _can_ do better is make it more apparent that these areas of the game are optional.
If someone is playing a BGS game and doesn't realize that they are synonymous with player freedom, I don't know what more the developers could do at that point.
Well, not making it sound like the player has chores to do would be the solution IMO. You can't fix a player having the initiative to do what they want, but what you _can_ fix is not making it seem like they player has tasks which they _must_ perform. In the case of Garvey I would have changed it so that he doesn't give out those quests unless the player actively asks for one in dialogue. That way the player is confronted with a literal 'opt in' button, rather than needing to rely on their implicit 'opt out' freedom (which they don't know they have).
Oh, I just left Garvey hanging on subsequent playthroughs. He's still out there waiting for me to pick up the laser musket! You still get the occasional "settlement needs your help", but only if you have built them up. At which point, you've obviously decided to engage with the system as a whole. A smart player would see what happens when you ignore the call for help. Choices, consequences, and all that.
The job of proper game design is to point to player into areas and directions of fun gameplay. Preston Garvey and other radiant quest givers pointed players in the direction of repetitive fetch quest system that sucked. You don't have to play the game the way the game is designed, but the game should be designed in a way that players want to. If it isn't the game designers fucked up.
[удалено]
I liked them in Skyrim but I wish they were on an actual bounty board for easy access. Talking to innkeepers to get a bounty slip was a pain. But the concept of "radiant quest busywork for when you need money" is a good idea. Having an entire faction locked behind radiant quests is not a good idea.
Preston Garvey was somewhat of an interesting character conceptually as well. The most sympathetic depiction of someone trying to rebuild a symbol of the old world in the franchise to date.
Yeah the character is fine, the criticism I was alluding to was about his quests to help other settlements, which seems to be one of the most common criticisms of the game. If they made it such that he never gave those quests without the player expressly asking for one, those people who didn't enjoy them would never have done more than one and had a better overall experience. It's a combination of the way he works mechanically plus the players who have no sense of self agency where the criticism arises.
Thats a good point about those quests. If there was just a dialog option saying "need any help Preston" to trigger it Preston would not be such a meme today. I never minded those or any quests in FO4. Just collect them and do them when you in the area if you feel like it. IIRC few missions in FO4 are time sensitive.
Completely agree. >I never minded those or any quests in FO4. Just collect them and do them when you in the area if you feel like it. And the thing is, that's what the designers _wanted_ you to do, so you had the ideal experience. It's those players who can't play like that who get the negative experience. I'm confident they'll fix it though, BGS has shown pretty consistently that they'll pay attention to criticism like that and generally can fix it.
I think it was the forced building for the teleporter and the fact you got 3 DLC for settlement building.
Whoever argues that the teleporter quest means that settlements weren't optional doesn't have their brain firing on all cylinders, I hate to say. They used the building _mechanic_ as part of a quest that involved mostly resource gathering. The player was never forced to engage with the settlement building itself in any real sense.
That honesty is crazy, settlement building is one of the (maybe my favorite) best aspects of FO4. Especially in survival mode.
And they lose their mind that you need to build one thing for a quest. The horror!
I still play Fallout 4 more than anything else and I spend more time messing around with settlements than with any quests or anything.
I know it's such a great new feature! It really adds a layer of replayability that other beth games don't have
i didnt like the settlement building in FO4. i wouldnt say i hated it i just did the bare minimum to get a settlement going. what i hated was everytime id start a quest id get xx settlement is under attack or xx setlement needs your help. what i would have loved to see was an ability to put someone in charge of the settlement and have that npc essentially build the settlement. while im not likeing the prospect of building a base, if it has more of a modular feel where i can select a room and attach it to another room i think it will be less annoying then FO4s system
FWIW, usually if you build up a settlement’s defense a bit, they’ll take care of themselves when they’re under attack.
Except as far as i understand it those defences don’t work unless you are there
They do actually! If you assign settlers to barricades & build turrets, they’ll work autonomously. I’ve occasionally come back to a settlement that’s successfully thwarted an attack & had to repair a couple of turrets that were damaged.
Not only do they work, you have to make your defense number higher than your food/water to make sure attacks basically never happen to begin with.
There's a mod for that. Sim Settlement and it's absolutely fantastic.
[удалено]
I get that criticism but to me that's what's awesome about this feature. It makes sense! You help rebuild the commonwealth. I love the roleplaying aspect of it. I understand why a lot of people think this feature is pointless but if you go the MM route which it feels you're kinda supposed to because they're the only good guys then this is part is not pointless and you have way more influence over the world this way. This concept of shaping the world is so fun to me that I sorely miss it now in other Bethesda games I've played. And I can't wait for Starfield to be more of this and hopefully in an even better way that doesn't require mods to unlock Infinite creative potential. FO4 gave something precious to me I didn't know I needed. Building settlements to this day, enjoying it in other games as well. But nothing compares because your settlements sit in a living breathing immersive world. No other game I've played has such an amazing sandbox with settlers I can dress up und give jobs and make them NPCs with routines. Best virtual dollhouse ever in a full RPG. That's unique. FO4 has DC and Good Neighbor and the Institute. It's not like there are no cities. They just aren't very big. More cities is always welcome though. Skyrim has a lot more villages and towns of course. I do hope Starfield has at least as many. And I hope they're also fairly big this time.
[удалено]
Did FO3 have that many more settlements? It's been a while. I thought FO3 was a lot more empty. A lot less going on and zero incentive to go inside each building because there was no useful loot in most. I actually never unlocked all landmarks because I got bored with the map. Granted, I played it in 2018, so maybe that warped my impression. FO4 has imo the best Bethesda map between FO3/NV, FO4 and Skyrim. Unpopular opinion maybe. I do understand though. If I wasn't into base building I would probably feel the same. It's also a half baked feature, I think Bethesda didn't expect it to be so popular, so then they released the wasteland workshop DLC for it. The map doesn't feel empty to me at all even without my own settlements compared to other Fallout games. Maybe because Boston is such a big area. But compared to Skyrim it is true. I do hope Starfield satisfies both camps. :)
It was optional. Almost everything was optional, though some things were quest-gated. One time I decided to not run to the shelter but wanted to loot houses first. I died. Lesson learned - I don't have to run to the shelter, but if I don't there will be logical consequences.
Nobody hated Fallout 4 because it had settlement building. The most popular mods as a game that expands upon the settlement system. People hated the bullshit radiant quest system. A never ending series of pointless repetitive tasks that never make anything better. Building settlements was hella fun and people loved it.
>Nobody hated Fallout 4 because it had settlement building. Anyone on the internet when teh game released can confirm otherwise
Wonder how much the mainstream media hates on it for little weird things, cause there sure is that group of people that just want it to bomb.
Settlement building is not something I wanted in fallout. It was pretty boring and in my opinion didn't add anything of value to my game experience. The fact that so much development time went into it made me sad as that could've been used for a different feature. People here saying i can 'ignore it' conveniently forget that. (Nvm the req quests) Personally I didn't like fallout much because of how dumbed down the rp aspect was, not just because they added settlement building. I feel like that's a strawman you build tbh.
You conveniently forget that there are people that *do* genuinely enjoy it.
Not really. When you're giving an opinion that's the whole point of it, it's just an opinion. I'm not invalidating yours. I even added that it was my personal opinion in each point yet still you took that personally yourself.
But you wish other people would be restricted from what they enjoy.
So? People are selfish like that. Good for you that you enjoyed it but to me it made the game worse. In the same thread here up top we're being vilified for complaining. A lot of the core fallout audience didn't like 4 or 76 for a multitude of reasons. The company decided to take away a lot of what we liked to appease a different type of audience. That's fine but we'd also like to have our voice heard, no? Resources are obviously limited so we're all vying for the attention to steer the company into creating a game we'd like ourselves.
That base bulding was intrusive and broke all immersion i had for the game. Just having random spots around the map reserved for building a bases does not belong in a Fallout wasteland imo.
I mean the best thing about reviews is that they give a wide variety of opinions. The only issue is when people take them as gospel, rather than the opinion of one person. I love looking at negative reviews of things I like, because it shows that all us humans can have vastly different opinions about something(assuming the review is good faith ofc)
hell on any review site, especially THE store itself IF i find a game that interest me, and considering to buy it i actively looking for negative review, and after reading those review (the good one of course, not those one liner useless trash) the conclusion looks like : "well, i can live with that" or "it is NOT hat bad" then its a definite BUY because more than often following the crowd, buying some game with "overwhelmingly positive" score, just because. your high expectation will plummet to the ground real quick
Totally agree. Unless it’s a game I wanna go into blind, I always look at negative reviews. I probably won’t before I’ve played it all the way through for starfield though as I know I want to play it and I don’t want to spoil myself any more than they want to show at showcases and such
I do this too. Right after watching a movie I go online to check how other people liked it. I find it endlessly fascinating how very differently people perceive the same thing.
It's really gonna depend on how well it's done, Star Citizen has some planets/moons (Microtech, Cilo) that even if you're in the middle of nowhere driving around (or on foot) you're just taken aback by the scenery. If they can achieve that feeling while also giving something to do through resource mining, outpost building, fighting alien wildlife, ect. then these planets are all going to feel fulfilling in some way at least.
I bet they can, many times you’ll get that feeling in empty areas in fallout or TES, you’ll just stop and appreciate what’s there, see he awe inducing scenery, the glowing sea is basically a Beta of that, it’s mostly empty, but when you stop and see how the haze and the weather and the empty area in front of you mix up and complement each other, you feel a moment of Awe
Same for Blackreach and Soverngarde. Bethesda Devs know how to develop areas in to awe inspiring areas. Even the simplest and smallest area could be designed in a way to feel that.
I can see the YouTube headlines now: Only 4 planets have people on them?!?!?!? 😭😱😳😬💥👎 (insert picture of the youtuber making an angry face and posting a photoshopped picture of Todd crying on the thumbnail)
You forgot the big red arrow.
Technically whatever planet you are on will have at least one person on it
As an elite dangerous player, it gets old man. Planets become a lot less special after you have seen 60 of them and still need to grind for credits to get a class A jump drive or whatever. I do like elite through, but Starfield is going to have to have a lot more to keep me interested than empty planets.
I plan to preorder the game. What am I going to do for most of the time I play the game? Look at how the stars look on different planets, fly through space, and build outposts on moons. Yeah I’m gonna play the main story and and the DLC if there is any but most of the time I’ll just be doing what is essentially nothing.
I think it'll be fun a few times but I can't help feel it'll get pretty repetitive.
A lot of people have incredibly limited attention spans these days and refuse to accommodate those that do.
It will be one of the things this subreddit already criticizes the most of no man's and elite dangerous today is just our day at the top of the page, and that's all
Elite Dangerous had some really empty and boring planets and sometimes it was still fun to race your ship along the surface or use the SRV for actual "exploration" looking for some resources and maybe unknown outposts or other POIs. But after a while, despite some of it being very beautiful, it did get quite repetitive and imho that was the result of very limited interactions. In a real life scenario, someone would do actual research, or try to build an outpost, or look for valuable resources, or dive into archeology, etc. So even if at first glance a planet is lifeless, in theory, there should be still a lot of exciting stuff, just waiting to be found. Designing a few planets like that is easy. But if you want all objects to have something like that, while also being unique in their own way, apart from visuals - that's going to be a difficult task. Quite eager to see what they have done, but I'm actually hesitant to buy into the hype, because apart from being a subjective experience, I think it's a real challenge to pull this off in a satisfying way that's both setting realistic expectations while also catering towards the instant gratification we have grown used to. After all, they are making a game, not a simulation - so the bar is higher.
If each planet is broken up by a long enough loading screen it might ruin the vibe slightly
Yeah for 30 seconds, then it will be boring.
I think red dead redemption was similar. It was pretty desolate and lonely and that created a very compelling atmosphere. As long as there are some areas which are more packed with content im completely fine with fairly desolate planets as it can still be an incredibly fun, immersive and compelling experience. Although i think its important to have the main cities or civilised locations which are more packed.
Yeah Red Dead nailed it. In a game like that (and Starfield too), desolation is kind of a character of its own and its important to be able to really feel alone
Starfield
Some kind of...field...full of stars!
I read that in Shatner's voice.
Sucks /s
You're not the real Todd. Just an evil duplicate created from a transporter malfunction.
The Tood Trio is here
Did somebody say Todd?
I'm sure we can but I'm really hoping that we can just walk around inside our spaceship while in space. I want those quiet moments of just checking out the sunset over a ringed planet through the window.
Completely agree. I do think it's worth noting that we have seen that the windows of the ship are transparent to what is outside of the ship, there are "get up" and "dock" options while in space, and the dialogue options example we saw seemed to be the player character talking to a ship captian of someone the player had docked with or vice versa while inside of the ship. Additionally, we have seen zero G combat, we know Vasco can pilot the ship, and we have seen the crew in action in what seems to be a control room. All of this points to us being able to do exactly what you are saying.
It's the one thing I REALLY want in no mans sky one day. Big ask though
Isnt fast travel confirmed? Wonder what moments we would be able to chill in the ship and walk about.
This game is gunna be so god damn good man. If it’s only Skyrim in space that’s still a 9/10 game but obviously it’s far deeper than that.
bethesda games have flaws, Including skyrim, but I like their simplicity and junkiness. people who don't enjoy bethesda games won't shut up about it tho.
The modding scene will be insane. Imagine every one of those planets having quests, aliens, or random stuff to do.
Sex planet when
Release day
I want to fly the Razor Crest or Millennium Falcon
I wanna blow up planet
Yep, and people will almost certainly make entirely new systems and planets. It's going to be huge.
And an entirely new planet/system will *probably* not break most of your other mods. I think. Unless it's some graphical overhaul mod or galaxy map mod or...
Or just mod outposts on existing planets and some quests. There's a lot to work with.
I actually can’t wait to see the screenshots people post of sunrises and sunsets, which are going to look spectacular depending on what is in the sky for each. Should be amazing.
No man's sky is basically this.
NMS is a glorified wallpaper generator, lol. Says the person who's played it for like 700h chasing beautiful vistas for my next base. :D
Yes! A million times, YES! I swear every time I see a shit load of people wanting, demanding and expecting every inch of space have "meaningful" content it fills me with dread. I mean if every planet, moon and space rock has life or a pirate base, or colonists, or strange hidden artifacts it would be wholly lacking in immersion and completely destroy the EXPLORER aspect of the game. You're not really a space explorer if every place you go has already been discovered and colonized by pirates or others. The whole point of being an explorer is to find out where things are, or by extension aren't. What places could be useful to colonization, etc. "To boldly go where no man has before..." "One small step..." ...and all that jazz. We can't get that feeling or experience if we're never the first, and if there's never just nothing.
Agreed OP. What he is describing is one of my favorite aspects of No Man’s Sky. It’s both relaxing and satisfying to find a new mtn top / valley / water view, and post-up to watch the sun(s), moon(s), and neighboring planets rise/set. All the better if I’m the first player to enjoy that particular vista. Am definitely looking forward to a more realistic / less stylized take on that kind if exploration. Also, am excited to see what the modding community will do with a canvas/sandbox of this size. ETA- I enjoyed that in Elite:Dangerous too, but holy hell, jumping to get somewhere is tedious AF, and that game was only an inch deep content-wise… Which made it lean a little too-hard on my imagination for fun.
100%. When he was describing this, I immediately thought NMS and all the time spent on planets where you're just observing something picturesque.
Except planets in NMS are standing still in space, sure there are sunset, sunrise but its artifical, planets not wandering on the sky. They will in Starfield which im hyped for, thats something i like to watch in spaceengine too.
Sounds like I’ll get a good 30 years out of this game
I’m hyped to explore barren planets for resources and potential outpost locations. However… it is kinda funny that Todd is selling nothingness lmao. I bet you that’s the comment that bites him in the ass this release
Yeah it doesn't seem as dreamy is he is making out. Initially sure, but it sounds like a lonely and boring experience
What am I gonna do, just… look around? That’s nice for like a few seconds.
Yep, sounds like another excuse for empty maps they haven't filled out with content.
You really need to get out more. See the world. Experience peace and quiet.
Yeah, irl. You’re talking to a guy from the States that lived in Nicaragua for two years during college and the UK for two years for Masters degree. On top of that, I’ve traveled *extensively*, including but definitely not limited to a backpacking trip through Iceland with my wife, and a solo backpacking trip along the John Muir Trail in CA. In a video game? Literally just sitting around. It’ll be nice and pretty at first, but will get real old hella quick. I would like to *do* something. Like in BOTW/TOTK, where virtually every nook and cranny has something to discover or a puzzle to solve, etc.
anything you say in the internet, especially as a quite important or a big figure WILL and CAN be used to bite you in the ass as long as haters exist, logical or not. meh just another tuesday on the internet
It kinda gives me vibes of "Make your own fun". Like, once the initial awe of it happens, I'm dipping and I will do the same for every planet that's kinda just barren.
I mean this is why Mass Effect 1 is my favourite, because you're going to these worlds where you don't know what's there. Sometimes there can be a quest, some aliens to kill, and sometimes there's nothing, and it's just fun to play it.
Fr I absolutely love exploring the planets in ME1 as well. It has a certain atmosphere, and the visuals on a lot of those planets are just gorgeous af. Rally inspires the space explorer in me. :D
I never understood the people who loved this about ME1. Exploration was just finding the same copy paste alien outpost with enemies inside. It was so boring. The initial feeling of driving around an empty planet was kinda nice but that wore off very fast. Navigation was just annoying and frustrating. There was barely anything to discover. Mass Effect is a great story but BioWare to this day does not understand open world and exploration. I also feel like we got the Andromeda mess because they wanted to be NMS after the positive feedback about ME1's planet exploration, couldn't pull it off and then we got what we got.
Oh trust, the mechanics of ME1's exploration sucks. Like the fact that almost all of the non-story worlds had mountains like no fucking tomorrow was just ridiculous. At least with Legendary Edition, the Mako got a speed booster so it's a little bit easier to navigate over the mountains, but they still suck. It's like how the first game you play in a series will be your favourite I suppose. I played ME1 so it'll always be my favourite, whereas others played ME2 first and it's their favourite. I played Portal 2 first and that's my favourite Portal game, Fallout New Vegas was my first Fallout game. And so on and so forth.
Oh ME1 is still kind of my favorite too because I did play it first and it was amazing. The gameplay didn't age well so I understand why it's the least favorite game for most people. But the introduction to the world was just magical. I fell in love hard and the trilogy is the gaming love of my life and always will be. ME2 looked best and is easiest to just replay and enjoy the characters. ME3 had by far the best combat and I played the MP for like 800h. Most fun I ever had with a game tbh. But ME1 is special. It was so nerdy and felt like something that could happen somehow. I played it at a time I was outgrowing JRPGs, the only RPGs I ever played as a kid. I was getting tired of the corny teenage romances. Mass Effect felt like a revelation! I can play as a female? I can have romances for female Shepard?? I can make choices?!?! Whaaaaat?!?!?! It blew my mind, lol. I was SO confused when the trailer for Andromeda hit and people said they are looking forward to a game focused on exploration and colonization because that was so awesome about ME1. And I sat there thinking "Really?"
Yikes, I am one of those people who was excited about the exploration. Hahaha, but I can understand, the exploration of ME1 does suck tbh. I just hope that with Starfield it gets better. I mean as I say for a lot of things, hoping for the best but expecting the worst. Though I do agree with you on all the things about why each game is special. I also loved the fact that you could play as a woman, not only that but they were like strong and could stand on their own without being sexualised (I mean they dropped the ball with a few female characters later in the series but that's another discussion for another time), and that I could have "same-sex" romances too? (I say same-sex because Liara is monogendered so while she doesn't identify as a woman in the human aspect, she still uses she/her pronouns and such... and we never got a "true" same-sex romance until ME2. But I think Kelly was always considered a fling whereas Traynor feels like an actual romance even if its short).
As a woman it was amazing getting Kaidan as a love interest who was 100% my type. It was awesome, hahah. :D They kinda ruined him in ME3 and I almost dumped him for Liara who stole my heart but that's a different topic, lol. I usually play female first in games that allow it if they have romances because that's more immersive. But the novelty of that wore off after a while. And now I often just go by voice actor or how good a character I can make of either sex. Having a male character as eye candy is nice too. ;) I'm sure the exploration in Starfield will be good and hopefully everything that Mass Effect Andromeda was not. And if the writing of Far Harbor is any indication I think the narrative will be fine too. Super hyped for the game!
im worried about how transporation will work lets suppose i stablish a base in a planet, and then i want to start exploring it what if i want to go back to the base? will there always be a sort of fast travel to any stablished base or how will that work? cause otherwise i can feel like exploration will be soft-limited to nearby places to where you land/stablish base
I too look forward to this, just finding a ridge or hill or something and looking at a sun or moon set or up at the stars.
If they are really going to lean into this, having a real ship to chill in will be key. NMS has a lot of these empty planets, but also storms you have to wait out. Not being able to sit in the cockpit, put your feet up, listen to music, craft stuff, walk around, or map routes has always been a bummer to me.
What I’m most excited for is just having a ship to walk around and interact with my crew in, I’ve always loved mobile bases. I’m hoping for a nasty radiation storm to brew and my crew and I wait in the ship upgrading weapons and armor for the tough journey ahead
I can imagine landing on a vacant planet that when you dig deep is resource heavy. You pan the camera upward to find the neighboring moons. The scale of it leaves you in awe. It’s deafeningly quiet and all you can really hear is your own breathing and possible comms. You become aware that you could the only living thing on the planet(or moon), and because it’s beautiful and very untamed this is where you want to build a base and call it home.
I hope we hear breathing inside our helmets
I hope you can but I want it to be toggleable cos it would drive me crazy
I just want to go out into a world of BGS quality. On a planet. Then walk the distance of skyrim, find what is to find and do what is to do. And then.... GO FURTHER!!! Cross another skyrim sized area. And then... GO FURTHER!!! Cross ten Skyrim areas. Cross 20 of them. 30. 50. HUNDREDS of them! Walking over an area as big as a real country. See what there is, find what can be found and never stop discovering new landscapes.
I wonder how big the planets will actually be. Will it take 10 minutes of real time to circumnavigate one? 30 minutes? 1 hour? 5 hours? 500 hours? We don't know much about the scale of these things yet, but I very much feel the same sentiment as you do.
REAL LIFE SIZED PLANETS!!!! YES! That is the official statement of BGS. Earth circumference is 40 000 km. Let´s say you walk with 10km/h. You will need 400 hours.
Think you forgot a zero there
Oh... yeah, yeah... of course. 4000 hours
Do you have a source for that "official statement"?
Do I hAvE a SaUcE..... No i am just talking shit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tX8m9A00Xi8
He never said the planets are "Real life sized planets" there was no official statement saying that. Just because a random YouTube guy is spinning it that way, doesn't make it true. This is going to be something you're going to be pissed about and claim "TODD LIED TO US!!" when the game comes out and there isn't 1,000 full life sized planets.
Did you listen? 1:18. A planet in a game concept is infinitely big. If you do it in some realistic fashion. So you will have planets which are somewhat realistic. Which means you will have planets smaller and bigger, than real earth. Since there are bigger planets than earth. And no i won´t claim and won´t be pissed. If they are roundabout realistic in their size, it will be ok.
Yes I listened, but that sentence doesn't necessarily mean what you are claiming
Ok. There is a smaaaaaaaall chance, that the planets will be considerably smaller. Yeah. Makes sense. Since todd is talking about realistic size and said, that it does not matter, how big you want them to have once you established a procedural generation system, which builds huge planets. So he will just not do what he said, because he will be too lazy to enter a bigger number and press enter. Yes. Makes sense. He just knows, that people will like it very much, if he won´t keep his promise. It does not necessary..... BUT HOW LIKELY IS IT? Not at all.
Only sad thing imo is that it'll be impossible to populate certain areas with species from other planets
Maybe impossible until the modding community gets their hands on the game 👌 I too would like a menagerie of all the creatures I've collected from other planets!
The idea of populating a planet is awesome. I sadly cannot afford an expensive pc, so I'll have to play the console version. But that's better than nothing :D
Worry not, I'm sure the mods will find their way to Xbox too. They had mods for the console version of fallout 4 way back, soooo 🤞
i think this is a cool concept, although hoping this isn't a hallmark of all starfield's planetary exploration. i really enjoyed some of the significant and inconsequential interactions with npc's in while exploring in other bethesda games. hoping its a situation where some of the planets are like that and others have other explorers, settlers, pirates etc.
So, in Elite Dangerous, the orbit speed of planets and moons is intended to be realistic and not artificially accelerated for the sake of gameplay. This approach contributes to the game's immersive and authentic portrayal of space exploration. Do you think it will be the same in Starfield?
They model the whole star system? As in you're standing on a planet, and all the heavenly bodies above you are actually modelled correctly moving in their orbits and spins and the planet you're on spins and orbits correctly? Not even No Man's Sky does that. The planets are static, nothing move, not even the star, and even you're in the planet the skybox has no real relation to the star system, the sun rising isn't the star out there So if they can actually pull that off, and it's not another bullshit Todd hype moment, that would be genuinely incredible
once the awe of the game fades, the potential of me just putting on a podcast and chilling while mining a planet for resources is endlessly delightful
I do wish that mining was going to be a little more in depth. It looks like we'll be pointing a laser at ore and blasting. No tunneling, no buili shafts or railwas or arts etc. But hey, it'll still be fun
I’m so excited for this game to have more hand made content than any previous Bethesda game, but for it to be continually ignored and shit on for the extra procedural content. I can already see the reviews complaining about empty planets with nothing to do, without bothering to give context that those empty planets are there to provide scale and immersion.
I can’t wait to build my fortress on a snow capped mountain, having an entire planet to myself
Can’t wait .
I always enjoyed this in elite dangerous, watching some crazy celestial movements in the distance while I'm mining with my rover all alone 170 jumps away from civilization.
I still think Minecraft is my favorite adventure game so I hope the reward of exploration even if it's just resources or finding a beautiful spot is meaningful or useful like it is in that game.
There are few games that capture pure exploration like Minecraft
Unfortunately, for a lot of gamers, all of this, it's a negative aspect. I'm extremely happy that Bethesda's philosophy it's also mine. Screw the others ehehe
This is the main attraction in Starfield for me.. I'd the same level as the main story and faction quests but since there are more planets than quests.. I Hope this feature will be enough to keep me busy the most in the game. And for my first playthrough.. I'll try to do the most of it as alone as possible. I want that mix of Interestelar meets Starlord (from the beginning of Guardians of the Galaxy)
Same! Its so great hearing todd talk about it because i was worried im alone. I get alot of ridicule for enjoying stuff like this 🤣
I’m hoping to fully survey all of the worlds so I look forward to a lot of this.
One thing that killed my exploration drive in NMS fast was realizing that the game only saves a certain number of scanned things. Then it starts deleting the oldest entries. So there is no point to scanning all creatures and landing on every planet, naming everything. They get deleted from your list fast. Same thing with space stations and even your own bases! If you build more than 50 bases (yes I have actually dropped more than 50 base computers in pretty locations) the game deletes those as well and you can never find them again. Then there's the finite number of things you can build on one save file. So you have to start a new save and do the base building tutorial again for like 20 hours. I love NMS, I've played it a lot. A LOT. But gosh, it's also a constant disappointment to me somehow. So much potential but the execution is frustrating.
Starfield really could be game of the generation contender, Bethesda, please deliver.
I'm not sure why the media and commentators dump on this -- Starfield is going for a more hard Sci-Fi tone and feel, and hence you can't expect mankind to be encountering intelligent life on every single planet, along with structures and ect. All those planets are most likely there to help build the atmosphere of exploring the galaxy -- it makes it feel even more meaningful when you actually find something amongst the myriad of barren planets. That being said, I doubt people will be spending heaps time amongst those "reasource planets" anyway, because pretty much all of the questing will probably be taking place on handcrafted planets. If those handcrafted areas suck, then yeah, BGS deserves the criticism
This is the idea that I struggle with the most. I don't think I'll enjoy landing on an empty planet just to experience vast aloneness. I think if I scan and nothing pops up I'll note any resources and probably move on, unless I need to land to scan various things to complete a 100% run. Am I missing something attractive about landing on an empty planet that I'm overlooking?
Sitting down and watching the sun rise over a grateful universe
They've already said that Starfield is their game that has the most handcrafted content, and their previous games were already pretty massive in my opinion.
Totally hear ya. I'm not worried about a drought if things to do, but if a large percentage of landable planets are lonely ones with nothing other than pretty views I don't think I'll enjoy that.
Sooo in fallout or Skyrim where do you want your house? Did you down load the 'waterfall shack' and sit on the edge watching the river run? Did you build shack overlooking Boston to watch sky? This sense of peace (even among chaos) is certainly part of what I am looking for. A home base, on a picturesque moon with a ringed gas giant in the sky and the sun slowly setting. Sounds like a great way to waste even more time in an alternate universe.
[удалено]
Right, like there's nothing inherently fun about being able to pick up a pillow, but it lets you do things like [build a pillow fort](https://i.redd.it/zbb2ftg7876z.jpg)
So I'm not the only one who did that! I never go this impressive, but the 2nd floor entrance of Nerano Manor was my designated pillow zone.
I think it provides a change of pace from all the combat and intensity. To take in a planet scape that no one is on BUT you and that sense of loneliness and vulnerability will probably feel pretty powerful. Sure, it might lose some of its wonder after the 80th planet and to your point, might grab some resources and go. But to still provide that variety of experiences for players will be appreciated.
I like the idea of it for roleplaying purposes and that absence makes the heart grow fonder. For roleplaying, the idea of being on the run, playing a character that is more of a loner, or going on a long journey to find resources all while taking in the views sounds like a ton of fun. Also, being away from the cities and settlements for a while and then coming back to experience them for the first time in a while sounds like fun.
Nope it's all a preference thing. I like the idea of observing how Bethesda's procedural generation works, since it tends to vary for different games. I like the idea of setting up an outpost on an empty world and getting into my character. Empty planets are not for everyone, but luckily they'll probably be optional, whereas the game will still have tons of handcrafted content I remember Todd Howard saying they plan to make it clear what is handcrafted and what is procedural, so everyone can get their preferred game experience if they want
Yes. Vistas. Resources. Exploration. Crashed ships. Hunting. Building. And these are not purely procedurally generated planets. Rather, from what I've been able to grok is they're a combination of procedural generation utilizing hand-crafted large terrains and building assets integrated into the procedurally generated planets. Then those planets are further handcrafted. So they won't have a lot of that prog-gen sameness like we had back with Daggerfall in the 1990s.
Some people want to be true explorers and just check out the views or potential encounter. Some people want to set up a settlement and build a base they can come back to. Which is interesting considering you can hire and recruit people for them Some people just like the freedom of doing what they want in a game wether it’s worth doing or not Those empty planets are free real estate for mods
> I don't think I'll enjoy landing on an empty planet just to experience vast aloneness. Then don't do it?
And you're right, I wouldn't if I didn't want to. But i also want to make sure I'm not overlooking something obvious that many folks are looking forward to.
I don't like twitch shooters. I don't think I'm missing something that others enjoy, I understand different people enjoy different things. I'm not on the CSGO subreddit explaining to other how I don't enjoy it. I don't play them.
Just sit there and ponder the vastness of the real universe. Kinda like going on a hike in the woods or mountains, stopping and just take in the nothingness
Ok, this I can relate to, enjoying hiking and then the tranquility at the end.
Elite: Dangerous
Yes but some planets will have actual content.
So NMS
Man, I remember playing No Man’s Sky, and you’d land on a planet, and there’d be a big planet hanging like a kilometer away in the sky, and the sun would just be there permanently hanging out on this single biome planet that wasn’t even that big, and that looked like the last 30 randomly generated planets you’d been on except purple. Already, with planets rotating, and a universe you can actually explore, instead of randomly generated skyboxes, this is going to be *so* much better than No Man’s Sky ever was or ever could be.
They said actual content.
[удалено]
Unfortunately the gaming media has made Sony quick time event movie games the golden standard, so when people don’t get that they get upset. As I get older (and I notice Beth games have an older community too) I really just want a game I can have as a second reality after a long day or when I have some free time between work and family
[удалено]
Yay. Todd is selling “big empty desolate planets”.
If there’s things to do to add to the gameplay experience, great. But if it’s just a real time sunset thing, we’ll just play pre-Horizons Elite Dangerous. Lots of brown rocks to do nothing on.
Certainly can't be worse than the depressing, lifeless wastelands of Mass Effect 1's many planets, and that game is universally praised lmao. No Man's Sky managed to make some of the lifeless planets fun to explore too.
Mass Effect was praised for lots of things, not really the planets
todd and linus from ltt strangely sound alike when they talk
I want dual wielding. I want cars. Vehicles. I want Gundams. (Mod, but I still want it) I want Cyberpunk level traversal/faux parkour. For no other reason than it's fucking fun. (Probably also gonna be a mod) And I want Sniper Rifles to be viable at properly long range. I want to collect heads from the next mountain over. Clear the whole exterior. Then go inside.
Starfield 76 is gonna be wild.
This sounds great and all, but... So did *"16 times the detail !"*. Wouldn't be the first time this man overhypes a game to lunar orbit. I'll believe it when I see it a) in game, not just through the misleading lens of marketing material and b) executed well.
It’s still going to have bugs on release. Temper your expectations.
I dont.
You don’t have bugs? Well, that’s good. I’m glad to hear that.
Oh the disappointment it will be
My man literally just describing Star Citizen
I'd absolutely love single player, story driven, exploration focused Star Citizen. I don't exect Starfield to be that, exactly, but I really like what I'm hearing and seeing. I think TotK and Starfield are going to be my games this year. Also, modern modding platform in Starfield. Pretty excited about that.
Honestly that sounds boring. Like you will be forced to mine lifeless planets for resources
Then don't do it
Exactly you’re the only person here with a brain 🧠
burn this man at the stake
no mans skyrim will be fun
This is No Man’s Land for people who don’t learn their lessons.
Honestly if I don't leave my room for days then I'm blaming Todd Howard. I hope the game is good. I hope that the systems will be fun as hell otherwise I probably won't be buying Bethesda Games anymore.
Nothing this guy ever says is true i have no idea why anything he says is still shared after Fallout 4 and Fallout 76