Starfield, Bethesda's Space RPG Spectacular

Now that I think about it, why the hell does the game lack plasma weapons? FO3 and 4 had them, and plasma is a common sci fi trope.
Particle Weapons and Plasma Weapons kinda cover a lot of the same SF tropes when you look at them? Heck, one could argue they're basically the same when you get into the nitty gritty of how you'd need to make a plasma weapon to get it to work...

Also Particle weapons have their own skill on the skill tree, it's in the second row, so they may not be covered by ballistics.
 
Particle Weapons and Plasma Weapons kinda cover a lot of the same SF tropes when you look at them? Heck, one could argue they're basically the same when you get into the nitty gritty of how you'd need to make a plasma weapon to get it to work...

Also Particle weapons have their own skill on the skill tree, it's in the second row, so they may not be covered by ballistics.
I think you're right about the particle weapon skill. But jesus, a whole skill for like 2-3 weapons while ballistics covers over 10 lmao.
Particle weapons don't really fit the 'game plasma gun' trope though, think Halo plasma pistol or Fallout plasma weapons. 'slow blob of energy' sorta weapons.
 
One thing they don't tell you is that to get to outpost engineering. Where you can research the basic outpost bits, requires you to spend at least 8 skill points in other scientific skills just to unlock it. So no you really can't open up an outpost and have it mine from you from the get go.
 
One thing they don't tell you is that to get to outpost engineering. Where you can research the basic outpost bits, requires you to spend at least 8 skill points in other scientific skills just to unlock it. So no you really can't open up an outpost and have it mine from you from the get go.
Yeah way too many skills require too many levels to gain.
To rush for an end-tier skill (which are usually kinda 'meh' anyways), you have to put a LOT of levels into that line...
 
I think you're right about the particle weapon skill. But jesus, a whole skill for like 2-3 weapons while ballistics covers over 10 lmao.
Particle weapons don't really fit the 'game plasma gun' trope though, think Halo plasma pistol or Fallout plasma weapons. 'slow blob of energy' sorta weapons.
Particle Weapons are generally REALLY powerful for their tier, so I can kinda understand why they'd put a separate tree for them. I think there's fewer EM weapons than Particle weapons though, and they have their own tree too, though given EM weapons are a very different beast I kinda get why that is too.
 
Okay, here's my actual review.

Story:

Starfield is set in the year 2330. You are a denizen of the Settled Systems, a number of colony worlds split across two major polities, the United Colonies and the Freestar Collective. There are other factions, like the mysterious House Va'ruun (a group of religious zealots who burned much of the Settled Systems in a great crusade nearly a century before), as well as Crimson Fleet pirates, Spacers (murderhobo raider druggies), Ecliptic mercenaries (a barely-legal PMC that also engages in smuggling and wanton murder), and various megacorps with dubious ethics.

Starfield is written less like a true upbeat space opera and more like a cyberpunk story. It is very gritty and pessimistic at its core, laced with venomous commentary about real-world social issues, like The Outer Worlds. After Earth became uninhabitable over a century before, and after a brutal Colony War between The UC and FC a couple decades before which saw the use of giant mecha and mind-controlled alien monsters in warfare, there is grueling poverty and practical indentured servitude everywhere. The housing problem is so bad, some people live in shipping containers.

I felt that the story was a bit of an unfair bait-and-switch. On the surface, Starfield promises a story about exploration, about getting far away from civilization and being in nature in all its wholesomeness, or going on an expedition and encountering environmental hazards and hardships, like reading Roald Amundsen's autobiography about his trip to the South Pole, but when you scratch the surface, this seedy little Frank-Herbert-meets-Neal-Stephenson-esque tale of societal corruption and personal drama spills out. I don't have a problem with the latter kind of story. I like seedy, angsty, depressing stories just fine. I'm not expecting good, clean, Christian sci-fi here, okay? However, it feels like a far cry from what the game's advertising actually promised.

Starfield is not a story about one's experience of self-discovery, summiting a mountain on a faraway planet. There is no storytelling specifically about that. That's a gameplay feature, pressing W or pushing your analog stick forward and wandering towards another bland slab of heightmapped terrain while your NPC follower makes some asinine quip about how gray and empty everything around you is. The actual story here is like an inferior Mass Effect ripoff; a glorified police procedural. Almost everything story-wise that you do in this game involves either rounding up criminals, or acting like one. The vast majority of the plot takes place in populated, urban areas, dealing with urban problems.

Your excursions outside civilized areas are almost plot-free; go from point A to point B, kill all the pirates over here, or grab the artifact over there, and return to society, and that's it. There's no intrigue or storytelling specifically about exploration or colonization. There isn't a moment where your ship breaks down and your crew contemplates resorting to cannibalism or anything like that. There are no experiences of wilderness survival, period. There aren't any moments where your character is pitching a tent in a field while their voiced internal monologue rolls along like a diary, and your character is unvoiced anyway. Every bit of "exploration" in this game is a brief jaunt to an empty field full of rocks, followed by your crew full of manicured socialites lamenting that they're missing their Space-Starbucks and want to return to Space-Seattle to get one and drink it while thumbing their Space-iPads. Jeremiah Johnson this is not. To make matters worse, most of the planets you visit are chock-full of abandoned outposts, so they've technically already been explored by other people at some point in history; you're just retreading the same ground.

At the start of the game, you can create your character, set their body type and appearance, their starting traits, and so on. Regardless of your character's background, you start off the game as a miner for Argos Extractors, working alongside Lin, your hardass Asian wine mommy boss, and the clueless Heller. At some point, you dig up an artifact that gives you hallucinations when you touch it, kind of like the Prothean beacon from Mass Effect. Then, pirates show up, for some reason, just to act as tutorial baddies to shoot. Then, a member of Constellation basically gives you a free ship, just as a ship tutorial. Are you seeing a pattern, here? The writing of the intro of this game is completely driven by the need to shove each of the game's gameplay conventions into the player's head as soon as possible, without any regard for pacing or interest. Unlike the cart ride and dragon attack at Helgen, the intro to Starfield has to be one of the most off-putting things I have ever seen. It is disgustingly boring and inappropriately paced. It's even worse than Fallout 4's whirlwind intro which grants you power armor right away. A guy gives you a whole ship, with no other reason than because pirates are after him because they think his ship is full of loot when it isn't. It's absurd.

Shortly after the intro, you end up joining an artifact-hunting group of explorers calling themselves Constellation. They're after these mysterious alien relics, like the one that made you hallucinate. They're part of a set, you see. The main quest is, at its core, a giant fetch quest to retrieve and unite all of these artifacts, which the head of Constellation, the snippy and enigmatic Sarah MILF, er, Morgan, thinks is important for some reason that is never properly explained.

At first blush, the dialogue writing in this game is atrocious. This is worse than regular Bethesda writing. It is abominable. Every second that passes, I'm gritting my teeth harder and harder with rage at the Netflix-style snarky college grad garbage and the unprompted, oversharing life stories every character spews at the drop of a hat. Shopkeepers and regular passersby will tell you all about their crushes and grudges like starry-eyed high-schoolers, and the only characters who insist on their privacy are almost universally cast as surly crooks with something to hide. It is nauseating. If this is a vision of the future, I don't want to live in it.

The companion and faction quests offer a far more interesting story with better dialogue than the main quest. Sam Coe, for instance, has a rather touching character arc, even if he makes some very questionable life decisions (like bringing his pre-teen daughter aboard a ship that regularly sees combat with pirates and could conceivably be blown to kingdom come). As things progress, the main story does develop and grow a bit of a spine. We see, later on, that Constellation are not as heroic or moral as they appear at first glance and are willing to do shady backroom trades in stolen antiquities to get what they want.

Like Skyrim and Fallout 4, the game has a dialogue system with dialogue trees where you can ask asinine questions you should already know the answer to, or move forward with a quest-giver in a conciliatory or snarky way. You can pick up repeatable quests from terminals, which saves you the time of having to talk to an NPC, but a lot of quests do require conversing with people. Deus Ex this is not; there is little in the way of branching paths. Your dialogue decisions have little to no impact on the plot and are almost purely aesthetic, except for how your followers react, or how much money you make. You know the drill. Immoral choices, like blackmail and smuggling, often make more money, while moral ones earn more brownie points with friends. There is no karma bar, unlike Mass Effect, so otherwise, your moral choices are irrelevant. In fact, the player is free to be completely unhinged and round up smugglers for law enforcement while secretly being a smuggler themselves. Nobody knows or cares what sort of person you are, except your companions, and your companions can always be told to wait outside while you use your leverage to squeeze someone for money.

In fact, a lot of characters in the game are very morally grey when you dig into their motivations. At the conclusion of some quests, it was difficult to decide who to side with. Some quests don't even make any sense at all, in light of the facts in the rest of the story. The end of the Freestar quest line sees you hunting down a crook who was pushing farmers off their land to mine minerals, but resources are free and abundant everywhere. There are thousands of destroyed stations and abandoned outposts to salvage, and if that isn't enough, there are enough minerals in the ground for the player to gather industrially significant quantities of metal just by building a few extractors in a field. What gives?

The side quests vary from the shady, like helping someone smuggle something or destroy evidence, to the zany, like helping a collector get a first edition of a book, or donning a monster costume to scare away annoying tourists (yes, that happens), to the upstanding, like assisting the UCSEC in nabbing criminals.

No attempt was made at any kind of scientific realism in this game. Even though there are no non-human sapient aliens kicking around, and even though the game goes for NASA-inspired visual verisimilitude, the writers' understanding of science and technology is superficial at best. When characters explain the scientific reasoning behind things, those explanations are often just flat-out wrong or implausible, or rely on a heaping helping of Space Magic. This looks like hard sci-fi, visually, but underneath, it's science fantasy. I don't really have any objections against soft sci-fi; Star Wars has plenty of space magic too, and it's a beloved franchise. However, again, this is a perfect example of promising one thing and delivering another. Starfield's aesthetic contains within it the promise of hard sci-fi. Why go to all the trouble of making everything so convincing visually, only to marry it to a script that seems a better fit for shiny chrome rocketships and silver togas?

There is a twist towards the end that I don't want to spoil. Suffice it to say, at some point in the game, you start to acquire supernatural powers. These are a lot like Dragon Shouts from Skyrim, mechanically, in that they have their own cooldown and act as a third dimension to combat aside from your handheld weapons and your mobility. The process of getting these powers is extremely repetitive. You have to do the same exact puzzle for each letter of the Greek alphabet. Yes, it's atrocious.

There is an NG+, and a few things, story-wise, can randomly be different in it. That was surprising, and a little Twilight Zone-esque.

Gameplay:

Starfield is an RPG-Shooter in the vein of Fallout 4, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Cyberpunk 2077, Borderlands, Destiny, and so on. You know the drill. The player gains a perk point to spend per level. Guns and armor have colored rarity grades that dictate how powerful they are and how many additional item perks they have. The Legendary weapons system is very much like in Fallout 4—some weapons have fixed bonuses that can't be changed or transferred to any weapon, like doing additional damage on a first hit on an enemy with full health, or doing more damage with repeated hits, or occasionally setting people on fire. There are a few different damage types; physical, energy, and EM, and three different corresponding armor and perk resistances, however, since you will regularly encounter all three damage types, there is little reason to plan your build around countering one specific kind. Va'ruun baddies favor energy/EM loadouts, while Pirates and Spacers prefer ballistic weapons. Every shootout plays out pretty much the same. Blast away at enemies, hold down the trigger a little longer for the ones with the big health bars, maybe use the game's lock-picking mechanic to hack a robot or some sentry guns to help turn the tables. Pretty standard fare, if you're familiar with Fallout 4.

You have a boost pack, but it's not like a typical jetpack. This one requires a perk to use, and it fires in pulses. One press of the button, and you're launched skyward a fixed distance, according to the type of the pack. It has a fuel bar, which is depleted by a fixed amount with each burst of thrust, and regenerates over time. If you boost off a high point, you have to make sure that you have enough fuel to feather the landing so you don't break your knees. The different pack types do perform differently. For instance, Power boost packs have so much thrust, on low-grav worlds, you'll hit the ceiling instantly. Since some planets have different gravity, it makes sense to keep different types of boost packs around in your ship to vary your loadout.

On high-gravity planets, your stamina runs out faster while sprinting, you take more falling damage and fall noticeably faster, and your boost pack is not nearly as effective. On low-gravity planets, it's the opposite; you can bounce across the terrain easily without expending much stamina, and you're less likely to suffer an injury. That makes them ideal for looting since they still have lots of outpost POIs despite being barren and devoid of anything else of value. Sometimes, if you board a ship with the grav drive disabled, you'll have to fight in Zero-G. While weightless, gun recoil will actually knock you back a fair distance, so you have to brace yourself against walls before firing.

The game has an environmental resistances system where you can be exposed to extreme heat or cold, corrosive environments, toxic gases, et cetera. This works a lot like the diseases system in Elder Scrolls; if you're exposed to an environmental hazard for too long, you might pick up an injury that lasts until you use the specific item to cure that specific kind of injury. You can also craft powerful medical items and chems to treat injuries and boost your performance. Many chems are made from a blend of a couple other chems, which combines and enhances their effects while freeing space in your inventory.

The perks in Starfield are a bit disappointing. Some unlock some rather basic abilities and should be no-brainers to pick on every playthrough, but many of them offer only a flat percentage bonus for some weapon classes and their damage output. There is an opportunity to mix things up with ship combat quite a bit by bringing along crew; your followers' perks apply significant bonuses to your ship's performance. However, bafflingly enough, you are limited to 3 crew on your ship until you unlock a master-level social skill that raises the crew limit, even if your ship is more than large enough to accommodate them. Unless you plow through social skills, it is much easier to get an endgame-level ship than it is to expand your crew roster. In order to advance perks, you need to meet challenge quotas that prove you're using the perk in question before it will allow you to spend a point to move up a rank. These quotas are often nonsensical, like taking falling damage to rank up Gymnastics, a perk that improves your gun stability in Zero-G.

The stealth mechanics in the game are gated behind a perk. If you don't have the perk, then you don't have stealth, at all. Even when crouching and hiding behind obstacles, enemies will detect you and the noise you make basically through walls, like you and your follower are a herd of stampeding elephants. Even with a couple levels of the perk, enemies are insanely perceptive and can spot you from very far away, to the point where the stealth mechanics are flat-out unusable. When playing through the Ryujin quest line, which basically requires infiltration skills, you will be tearing your hair out wondering why you had to save-scum a million times just to avoid being seen. Even Splinter Cell wasn't this brutal.

AI behavior in combat is generally lacking in aggression. Rather than pathing toward the player, aggressively pursuing you (unless the enemy in question is a guy with a knife or some alien critter), they will mostly sit in cover and wait for you to come to them. Your follower, who will frequently quip about you carrying too much stuff and becoming over-encumbered, has awful pathing and will often teleport to your position just to keep up with you.

Naturally, you have an inventory to carry your stuff around in. Unlike in prior Bethesda games, where being over-encumbered meant you were restricted to walking speed, in Starfield, you can sprint while over-encumbered, but you will run out of stamina (which is displayed in the form of a depleting O2 bar) much faster, your stamina will drain even at running speed unless you walk, and if you continue to move at full speed with depleted O2 and full CO2 (the red bar that appears after depleting O2), your health will start to deplete and your screen will blur as you suffocate. This is an unusual way to handle the encumbrance problem, and it means that it's possible to carry a shipload of stuff with you at full speed, provided you're willing to stand still periodically. It means that you're still capable of carrying on in a gunfight even over-encumbered, but getting back to your ship can be tricky if it's a kilometer away.

There is a lot of vendor trash in this game and very few options for sensibly getting rid of it other than dropping it. Vendors have very low currency limits that reset every 48 hours, kind of like Skyrim. Your ship's cargo hold is initially very limited, and if it's full, you can't add anything else. The game is very, very stingy with infinite storage chests; they're only really available at Constellation's HQ. Even the chests you can build in your settlements have a weight/volume limit. The outpost storage is completely laughable and imbalanced. You have to build literal walls of huge containers just to hold a few tons of ore, even though there are side quests that require vast quantities of material (like turning in ore at shipyards). This feels like the inventory management from Space Engineers, only worse. It's just plain annoying how much item juggling you have to do in this game. If you want to simply store everything on your ship, good luck. Cargo containers often make your ship too sluggish to dogfight, until you level up enough to unlock the most powerful engines in the game, and expanding their capacity only kicks the can down the road; it doesn't help the loot accumulation problem.

If you want to have hundreds of thousands of credits to upgrade your ship (because of course you do), then you will be picking up everything that isn't nailed down and trying to sell it, which will make you want to tear your hair out because of all the little stumbling blocks Bethesda will put in your way to keep you from efficiently getting rid of vendor trash. They do everything in their power to pointlessly time-gate currency to keep you from gaining credits too fast, from giving the game a horrifying economy where everything costs twenty times what it pawns for (even Recette Lemongrass would be shocked at how greedy these SOBs are), to forcing you to wait for vendor credits to refresh.

This is how you get rid of vendor trash in Starfield: you have 200 guns in your ship's hold, all of them worthless except for their value in credits. You go to one vendor, sell between three and five guns, depleting all of their credits, walk to the next vendor, sell between three and five guns, walk to the next, fly to the next planet with vendors that have more money until you run out of planets with vendors, and then, you wait 48 hours so you can sell another forty or so guns, rinse and repeat. It's excruciating. Imagine a game where every vendor is Rick Harrison from Pawn Stars who will give you "fifty bucks" for that rifle you lifted off a pirate's corpse, and they tell you their life stories at the drop of a hat and expect you to do things like kindly go beat up loan sharks for them. I want to kill every shopkeeper in this game by strangling the life out of them with my bare hands and watching the light in their eyes die.

A lot of the loot is very disappointing. You can plow through a dozen POIs and never see a single gun worth keeping. The faction quest rewards are even worse. Many of them aren't even leveled, which makes them weak compared to what the player will likely already have by that point in the game.

The ship-building mechanic is kind of basic compared to a lot of sandbox games out there. You can snap together some dozens of prefabs to build a ship, and there are several different manufacturers with their own aesthetics (each weapon and ship manufacturer has their own lore, and some have offices and staryards you can visit; a nice touch). A ship's internal layout is auto-generated based on an opaque priority system. There is no way to get it to lay out ship habitat modules the way you want it to, in terms of ladders and doorways between them, aside from praying to get an interior layout that isn't a maze, or building huge gaps between habs to force a specific layout. Your ship cannot be any larger than 40 meters in radius in any direction (that is, it can't be over 80 meters long). Also, you are forced to build your ship with one bridge, one reactor, one shield generator, et cetera. No doubling up, for balance reasons. You are limited to three different types of weapons on your ship. Each category of device on your ship can receive no more than 12 power units from your reactor. This limits the amount of weapons or engines you can mount per category. For instance, with a weapon that takes 4 blocks of power, you can mount 3 of that weapon and no more (4 x 3 = 12). If you have a weapon that takes 3 blocks of power, you can mount 4 of them, and if it takes 2 blocks, 6 of them, and so on.

Ship combat is a bit like Freelancer or Mace Griffin. It is robust, but basic. You have pitch and roll controls, as expected. There's an afterburner you can hit to boost away from enemies and make some distance. There is a power allocation system where you can divert power to different systems on your ship to make weapons reload faster or boost shield power, but most of the time, you'll want to have shields and engines at maximum so you aren't a sitting duck. If you have the right perk, you can activate your ship's thrusters and perform drift maneuvers. Also, if you have another perk, you can enter a targeting mode to specifically damage enemy ship systems, like knocking out their shield generator or their engines. If you do manage to knock out an enemy ship's engines, and they're the last ship standing, you can board them and clear out the interior on foot. This rewards you with more credits and loot than simply blowing up the whole ship. You can also take over the ship and go to a landing pad to register it as yours, for a fee. The registration fee is only a little bit less than the resale value of the ship, an artificial contrivance which makes selling captured ships only barely profitable (again, the devs go out of their way to time-gate your earnings and keep you from gaining a windfall so easily).

The on-foot gunplay in Starfield is fairly satisfying. Even if the weapons are kind of samey mechanically (with a few exceptions; there is a minigun and a few different metal storm-style multi-barrel railguns, and they kick ass), they have very nice visual aesthetics and sound effects.

Weapons and armor can be customized at specialty crafting tables, using materials gathered in the field. You can change out optics, grips, barrels, muzzle devices, and so on, to make your equipment run exactly the way you want it to. Surprisingly enough, melee weapons cannot be upgraded or customized in any meaningful way and have basically fixed stats. Because of its poor stat growth, melee is strong in the early game, but its relevance fades a bit later on, especially when you encounter powerful boss enemies with big health bars and miniguns. This is not Call of Duty. Some enemies, especially on higher difficulties, are definite bullet sponges and take multiple solid hits to kill. Some monsters, like Terrormorphs, can easily absorb several hundred rounds of ammunition before dying, much like Deathclaws.

Unlike Empyrion, No Man's Sky, Space Engineers, et cetera, the planets in Starfield are not contiguous spheres. When you select a landing site, it generates a several square kilometer flat plane that represents the LZ. This procedurally-generated environment has invisible walls at the edges, and within, a smattering of random points of interest, like abandoned bases, geological features, flora and fauna, minerals to mine, and so on and so forth. If you've ever played Empyrion, this is just like the POIs in that game. You know the drill. Raid bases, kill pirates, take loot.

Starfield has a No Man's Sky-style scanning, mining, and outpost-building gameplay loop at its core. The way this works is quite simple. You can scan a planet from space to see if it has any of the elements you want for your production facilities. Then, land and use your hand-scanner to classify minerals, flora, and fauna. You have a handheld cutter that fires a mining beam to blast surface deposits, but there are also large colored patches on the terrain indicating the presence of subterranean materials (in solid, liquid, and gaseous forms) that can only be gathered by outpost extractors. There are dozens of different elements you can mine and extract, and a limited number of outposts you can build (governed by perks), and each planet only has a few different resource types, so if you want to produce everything, then your task is to find planets with multiple, overlapping resource types, and send resources from one outpost to pile up at another outpost with your factories. The cargo transfer system between settlements is buggy and broken and barely works. Instead of establishing a simple shared inventory, it takes materials from one place and dumps them into the containers at another. There is no guarantee that any of the materials you need will show up at their destinations, and if they do, they will quickly overload the containers there. It's not balanced or meaningful at all. It's a frustrating mess fit to make even a veteran Factorio player pull their hair out.

The exploration is decent, but it's held back by some occasionally rather ugly randomly generated terrain that makes for some very flat-looking environments, especially at midday. The assortment of creatures and POIs you can encounter are interesting, but they can also be very repetitious. It's especially egregious when some of the POIs in the game are structured such that you will encounter the same memos, the same clutter items in lockers, and, in one ridiculous case, the same identically placed corpse of the same person, on multiple planets, over and over again. Sloppy and immersion-breaking.

The POIs and random encounters could have used significantly more variety, and I don't mean by a small amount, either. Sometimes, you can walk from one POI several hundred meters to another POI that looks absolutely identical. I mean, there should have been at least ten times as many different POIs and random encounters, and some of them should have ideally been non-repeating. There just isn't enough variety here. I've had the same encounter with Space-Grandma five times. Maybe she has Space-Alzheimer's and doesn't remember me.

After you've scanned enough examples of a particular animal, various kinds of data will appear about that creature, such as their health, any weaknesses, what materials they drop when killed (or harvested from non-destructively), and their disposition (like whether or not they are passive prey animals or aggressive predators to be avoided). Some plants can be grown at your outposts for materials, and some creatures can be domesticated for materials, too.

Starfield has some of the worst-ever interactions with water and sea creatures I've ever seen in a game. The water effects are worse than Skyrim. You can't swim beneath the surface of water, only paddle around on the surface a bit in your space suit. You can see alien fish, whales, sharks, whatever, beneath the surface with your scanner, but only as outlines. The only time you see their whole carcasses is if they've been killed and floated to the surface, either by a predator, or by you shooting them through several feet of water. Grenades don't work on fish in this game at all. They don't even sink in water, just float on the surface. No blast fishing for you.

The game has a lock-picking mechanic to open containers and hack consoles. This consists of using a Digipick and completing a puzzle which involves rotating little pins on a ring-shaped dial to fit them into corresponding holes. Some sets of pins have different shapes that fit in different hole patterns in different orientations. It is entirely possible to make the puzzle impossible to solve if you use up the wrong ones too early and don't have the corresponding sets to get through the last the last rings. I got to be pretty good at solving these, but really, they feel like annoying playtime padding, like every lockpick mechanic in a game. At least they're not forcing us to play Sudoku. I'm looking at you, Mass Effect: Andromeda.

Graphics:

The graphics in Starfield are a mixture of beautiful and detailed consoles and buttons and technological artifacts slaved over by contractor artists working long hours with Max, ZBrush, and/or Substance Painter, combined with some of the ugliest, most uncanny valley-looking, waxy characters I've seen in a current-gen title. The dialogue system in the game does not have fully mocapped faces, but is instead phoneme and expression-based like previous Bethesda titles. This results in rather rigid facial animation interspersed with bizarre brow-wrinkling. The face tech in this game would have been revolutionary fifteen years ago. Now? It's stomach-turning. Don't believe me? Ask Vaas Montenegro in Far Cry 3, which came out eleven years ago. Now that's a face.

Granted, I am fully aware of the workload involved in doing performance capture in a game with this much dialogue, and why some developers still choose to take the route of manipulating characters' faces like a player piano, but in this day and age, this sort of tech just looks weird.

The procedural planetary environments are sometimes gorgeous, sometimes gruesome. It depends on how the lighting hits them. At sunset or sunrise, when all the terrain objects are casting long shadows, they look neat. At noon, they look flat and unshaded, with no impression of depth whatsoever aside from patches of unconvincing volumetric fog.

The cities have incredible architecture and a lot of fine details. Pipes, cables, scaffolds, and gratings are hanging everywhere. Environments look dirty and realistic and lived-in. The game's NASApunk aesthetic is very cool, even if it is in service of a fairly standard space opera and not a true hard sci-fi universe.

The game has some weird, ugly filters that put a greenish tint over everything, a lot like the bluish tint in vanilla Skyrim.

Character movement animations are a lot better than usual for a Bethesda game. Character movement animations are fully mocapped and they have momentum and accelerate into sprints and lean into turns. This is way better than the really stiff hand animations in older Bethesda titles. I still remember the Oblivion/FO3 era and how the character movement looked.

Sound:

The audio is on-point here; firearm discharges are extremely loud and fill enclosed spaces with a short, thudding reverb, just like the real thing. There is about as much attention to detail to the gun sounds in this game as there is in Battlefield, and it's quite impressive. There is something about firing off a Magstorm and audibly ripping a new you-know-what-hole into someone that is just *chef's kiss*.

I see some people out there complaining about the gun sound effects in Starfield, but this is really just a case of the Coconut Effect. So many people out there have never heard real firearms, they have no idea what they actually sound like. I'm a gun enthusiast IRL, and while not perfectly true to life, the naturalistic style of the gun sounds here is noticeable and impressive. The weapons here have a very Neill Blomkamp-ish feel, where even the sci-fi guns are plausibly engineered products and emblazoned with manufacturer's marks and fine details, and they have an auditory report to match.

Everything in this game sounds cool. Even doors sound cool. Every sound is tactile and has a sort of presence to it. For boost packs, you can hear where they sampled turbocharger blow-off valves and stuff, and it just sounds really nice overall. If you land too hard, your bones make a sickening crunch. Footsteps sound completely different depending on the materials you're running on, of course, but that's been a staple of game sound design for ages. The sound guys did an impeccable job, here.

Inon Zur's score for the game is breathtaking. I don't say that lightly. From the atmospheric ambient orchestral tracks that set the stage for your planetary sojourns, to the percussive and brutal combat themes, this is a soundtrack that belongs in a much, much better game.

Technical/UX:

Starfield is laced with a number of annoying bugs. Follower pathing is terrible, and they often get stuck on things, or run into walls and judder spasmodically. I've seen characters float up into the sky. Sometimes, objects on planets spawn in midair. Other times, you'll encounter UCSEC officers with no clothing, or geometry in cities that completely failed to load. Some cell transitions make the game thrash really badly and dip below thirty FPS, even on a very powerful rig. It is very clear that the engine is struggling to keep up with what they tried to do here. The physics are occasionally impressive, and occasionally screwy, depending on which way the wind blows.

There are a lot of subtitles that are just plain wrong, and they're filled with typos.

The interface is horribly designed and involves a whole lot of tabbing back and forth through multiple layers, making even something as simple as consulting a map for a fast travel destination into a chore.

The game lacked 32:9 support out of the box, but they're promising it in a future patch.

Overall:

Starfield is a very derivative, very paint-by-numbers game. It feels like playing a list of bullet points assembled by Todd Howard. It was made by committee. There were too many cooks in the kitchen and it spoiled the broth. It feels like an inferior clone of other, better RPGs that Bethesda themselves made in the past. There's the questing, the perks, the customustomization, the loot, the cast of zany characters. Everything you've come to expect from an RPG. But what if what we've come to expect is somehow wrong? What if it's not enough? What if what the gaming industry really needs is for someone to shake it out of its torpor and come up with something actually fresh and new? The same old garbage, the same rehashed adventures, are not going to cut it anymore. And, let's face it, for the budget this game had, they could have done a whole lot better than this.

Regardless, in spite of how sour I might sound, there are plenty of times I had fun with it, and I am looking forward to modders improving this game by volunteering their precious time for free for the sake of the sloppy ingrates who developed it.

Score Summary:

Story – 6/10 [The dialogue writing and overall scenario are bland and annoying. Most of the characters are snarky jackasses who regularly make poor life choices. Everyone pointlessly overshares their life stories. It's not all bad; getting involved in uncovering UC and Freestar conspiracies can be engaging at times, and some of the companion loyalty quests are touching. The intro sequence is extremely boring and off-putting, to the point of driving people to refund the game before they can even get to the vaguely interesting parts. The main story does improve and build up steam toward the climax, however.]

Gameplay – 8/10 [It feels like Fallout 4 with a new coat of paint, plus a bit of No Man's Sky. Combat is generally quite solid, so long as you aren't battling framerate issues (unlike Fallout 4, there is no VATS here to help you aim if you aren't getting a solid framerate, so it's really crucial that your hardware can keep up). The outpost and ship-building mechanics are generally fun, but they are marred by a horrible inventory system where resources and vendor trash pile up with no way to conveniently get rid of them. There is a somewhat interesting but repetitive and time-padding lockpick mechanic.]

Graphics – 7/10 [Starfield is a bit of a mixed bag, graphically. Some of the detail work and hard surface modeling on various technological props is eye-popping, and there are a lot of nice little specularity and PBR material effects everywhere. The cities have some very impressive details and architecture. However, this is counterbalanced by an overuse of color grading that puts an analog fade over everything, with grayish blacks and poor contrast. Some volumetric fogging in certain environments can be cool, especially when you're on Titan or at the Red Mile and you see fog hit by a light source like a street lamp or ship engine, but sometimes, it's a little overdone. Some planetary environments look extremely flat and unappealing at midday, due to a lack of overhanging environment objects and shadows, to the point where you'll be staring over a field full of crooked trees that looks like Mount & Blade 1 on low graphics. Really egregious. How could they not see it?]

Sound – 9/10 [This would be a 10/10, but I had to dock a point for audio bugs, such as sounds not playing when they should, or playing when they shouldn't (like the looping whistle of an in-flight 40mm grenade playing continuously in one spot). The sound effects are fantastic. Guns are punchy, ship engines roar and crackle like they were recorded from real rockets, and even the doors and airlocks sound cool. Inon Zur's score is mesmerizing and epic, and this game would be practically worthless without it.]

Technical/UX – 4/10 [Lots of bugs are still present. The subtitles are often incorrect, and there are a few lines of dialogue that use pre-release names for things that were changed later in production. Starfield has very poor optimization and did not ship with 32:9 super ultrawide support (though it is promised in later patches and currently available with a third-party fix). Even with my RTX 4090, getting a solid 60 FPS is a tall order. When walking between cells, there is a great deal of cache chugging. There isn't anything going on here, visually, that would account for the inconsistent performance, except for Bethesda's ham-fisted NetImmerse fork, the Creation Engine 2, being pushed to the very limit of what the underlying code can do. Considering that we've had games for years with seamless space-to-planet transitions and spherical planet topology, the randomly generated flat plane zones you can visit with your ship are technically unimpressive. There are loading screens and fast travel galore, and it really breaks up the pacing of the game. Maybe Bethesda should just ditch Creation at this point and get a real engine? Also, the menus and UI have way too much tabbing back and forth through several layers, making the inventory management problems even more apparent.]

Overall – 7.5/10
 
The procedural planetary environments are sometimes gorgeous, sometimes gruesome.
When they are gorgeous they really are.

I was just wandering a planet and this is what it looked like shortly after sunrise:
20230913002514_1.jpg

The morning fog just starting to burn off, the shadows on the hills. It was breathtaking.

Otherwise, I think that's a fair review. I actually think you might have undersold the shipbuilding system a bit. I actually like it better than Empyrion's to be perfectly honest. Yes, Empyrion's is more powerful and you can design many more styles of ship, but it's also so fiddly that actually building those ships in game takes hours and hours of work and you have to do every little part of it. Meanwhile Starfield's system lets you put together something that looks pretty cool and works, though you're absolutely right about the interior maze issue. I found the best way to handle that was basically to make single floor ships:

20230919011438_1.jpg
Like my, well, Romulan Warbird inspired design here.
 
Complaining about the idea of Starfield part II: imagining a completely different travel system that would have been much better. This is basically fanfiction at this point, but I've thought about this too much to stop now.

Based on everything I've seen, for a Game called Starfield, there seems to be very little importance to, well, stars. Another thing were Mass Effect was the better space game. This is stupid, adds to the sense of there not being any actual travel on the space end, just a bunch of fast travels. In game time seems to suggest grav jumps literally take zero time, so the fast travel is in fact worse than New Vegas, or any of the Fallouts, where the fast travel at least takes game time. Something that they forgot in their earlier games, and which would have improved many mechanical issues: for example, if a star jump took, say, a week, that would mean every vendor would have a chance to reset, things could progress in your absence on colonies, escetera.

Still, a better system where you can highlight, well, stars. And travel. And a level of actual world building. By actually describing the Jump Drive a bit, giving people something to imagine, even if the specifics weren't overly explored. Like Mass Effect. I remember reading Mass Effect Fanfiction when younger, and the fact that there was some explanation and interesting quirks for writers to explore was very helpful for people engrossing in the world. The fast travel means there is a zero sense of the actual working of travel in the game.

So, idea. I am starting from the assumption of using the 10 parsec map, so that there is a better, more interesting map.

wallpaper_0010pc.png


The basic idea I came up with, and spent too much time calculating. Jump Drive "inverts" a gravity field, making it replant, and turns your ship into takions, meaning they move faster than the speed of light. The Gravity of a body boosts you away. However, its hard to actually copy the gravity of a sun, and you don't naturally slow down. So, you need to jump by being propelled at a sun, and then break at a sun.

How fast your propelled is determined by basically the escape velocity at the point you activate the jump drive. For example, Our sun has an escape velocity at its surface of roughly 600 km/s, so a jump from the surface would be 600x light speed. Launching from 1 million km up would be a "mere" 500x. A light year every 18 ish hours, so a 5 light year jump would be 90 hours. Which obviously can be spread through. I believe the game generally has a 20-1 time compression, so 1 hour of real time is about a day of game time, at least by day/night cycles. You can have a higher time compression traveling, dependent upon if there's anything to do while traveling or not.

More importantly than exactly how its shown, giving at least a game time travel time gives an idea of the scale and how isolated things are. Furthermore, it gives some sense of terrain to things, because it makes stars unequal.

Red Dwarfs, most of the suns, are much smaller, which means their escape velocity at any given distance is much smaller. Sol has a radius of roughly 700,000 km. A red dwarf like Proxima Centauri only has a radius of 100,000 km. Escape velocity of 560 km/s on its surface, roughly 400 km/s some 200,000 km out. Since you need to accelerate and break, you need to get equivalent escape velocity on both ends.

So, Yellow to Red Star, you get into the right lane, dive face first into our star until roughly 1 million km from the surface, activate the jump drive, get propelled at 400x light speed away from the sun, to 4.4 light years away, taking roughly 4 days, accounted for in whatever way makes sense for the game (its an exploration game, at least as advertised, if not in actual practice, so the easiest way for travel time to actually matter is the same way in something like Oregon trail: consumables. Different issue though. Even if it only consisted of a map where 1 day = 1 second watching your craft move, that would be better than the current system).

This already adds some tacticile sense to the interstellar movement, currently totally lacking. You will also start and end each solar system hop diving into a sun, and then enter a new one with a face full of new sun, and I'm sure one can give the player a sense of the difference between a 100Mm red Dwarf and a 700 Mm normal star. Making the Stars in a game called Starfield actually relevant.

Besides giving the world a sense of how it actually works by bloody explaining the basic mechanics, this set up will also place the player in any new system near the star, which assumedly would be close to most of the main things in any solar systems, with mostly only optional secretes or big deals far out.

Though it also gives you an easy way for inter system mobility too: Earth for example has an escape velocity of 11 km/s. So, if you were in Earth Orbit, you might be able to jump to, say, Mars with its escape velocity of 5km/s, and jump between the two at 5x the speed of light. Its something like 10 light minutes between Earth and Mars, so 5x light speed would be a 2 minute real time trip.

So you can justify some pretty quick traveling within a solar system, but also a good reason you can't just use the jump drive anywhere. If you jumped within a solar system (where the escape velocity is always going to exist, otherwise the planets wouldn't be in orbit) without another object to break you, your propelled out into space as a gravity shadow at some multiple of light speed, to pass forever in the void until you all starve to death as ghosts in a ghost, maybe getting lucky and having your corpses pulled by happenstance into a sun so you at least get some sort of burial.

Setting a minimum acceleration/break mass also helps. I'm partial to 1 km/s, because that makes Pluto with is 1.2 km/s escape velocity the absolute smallest object you can jump to through FTL means. Anything smaller has to be reached through other means.

The fact that you can go faster based upon how deep into the gravity well you get also allows some meaningful customization of the ship. The sun has a surface temperature of about 6,000 degrees. The closer you can get to the sun, the faster you can jump. However, different suns might have different designs, so what one needs to optmize for might be different: light, heat, and radiation for example might be different enough hazards to suggest different optimal ships. A red dwarf for example is much smaller and cooler, roughly 3,000 as an example from Proxima Centauri, so with a ship with insufficient reflectors/coolers, you might actually be able to make a slightly faster trip on the "backroads" of jumping between red dwarfs.

And of course a ship optimized for dropping into Stars may not be optimal for missions deep into the cold depths of a system, if you do for some reason want to do a polar exploration mission to the edge of the system. If the object is too small to even jump to, the entire jump system would actually be dead weight, and a completely different ship type may be needed....

This system has one last very interesting effect, by looking at one of the rarer, but very interesting types of stars: white Dwarfs. There are I believe about 10 of these in local space, the closest being Sirius B. These are basically the cores of "dead" stars. Very small, very dense, and the residual heat of their death often leaves them very hot. How small and hot? Well, Sirius B is on the extreme end, weighing as much as our sun, being roughly 25,000 degrees (so 4x hotter), and roughly the scale of Earth.

Sirius_B-Earth_comparison2.png


Now, a game that just could give me a sense of scale between Sirius A, which is much larger than our sun:

1280px-Sirius_A-Sun_comparison2.png


Down to Sirius B, the size of earth, would already be a quite amazing game. But, the extreme small size and high mass has another major game/setting effect: very high escape velocities. Which allow for some very high speed. Sirius B is on the heavier and denser side of local White Dwarfs. Its surface escape velocity would be 6,766 km/s. More than 10x the suns. Assuming a 10 parsec/30 light year wide map like the initially listed, even if you managed to jump 10,000 km up at a mere 4,000x speed of light, you can cover 30 light years in a mere 3 days. Crossing the entire game map faster than moving between neighboring red dwarfs. At least, as long as there's another white dwarf on the other end to break your speed.

Now, though actually caring about Stars in a game called Starfield, and thinking about at least some science in our science fiction, we have an open world that, well, actually has terrain. Let me bring that map back.

wallpaper_0010pc.png


Now, at the highest level we have the white dwarf superhighway that you can move between anywhere on the map in under a week real time. This gives the player a super fast travel method to move to any region of the map he wants rapidly, while also giving structure to Interstellar civilization. I mean, if there's jump routs that are 10x faster than anything else, it seems quite likely that a lot of significant trade will move along that rout, and thus also have many major trade hubs.

With some exceptions, which could be quite interesting. Earth, for example, is not on the white dwarf superhighway. That would probably have political repercussions. Since the locations of the white Dwarfs are determined through non-human means, there may of course be white dwarfs in places where there's not much else. That little white dwarf in the far north looks to be in a quite lonely location. Which is just more interesting circumstances the game can play with.

Next level down from the White Dwarf super highway we now have A-K stars, stars large enough to have good escape velocities for fast interstellar travel and to have enough of a hill sphere to have extensive stuff. Depending upon how habitable the white dwarfs are, which I'm inclined to think not. This gives us defined provinces aground these hub stars, who can then have their unique characters and political interests.

And then we have the spokes of the red dwarfs. A multitude of relatively low effort systems, but because were clear they are red dwarfs, their low effort makes perfect sense: the stars are smaller, they're hill sphere is smaller so there's fewer planets, and because they're slower to travel to fewer people want to go to.

Most of the "important" ones are likely acting as hinterland/wilderness to the hub world one jump away, which is ideally one jump away from a white dwarf. That's probably most of "civilized" space. If you jump to a red dwarf only reachable by another red dwarf, your probably out in the wilderness. Which is great for a supposed advanture game, to have uncivilized, maybe even totally unexplored, two jumps off the highway! Far enough that it feels plausible to be unexplored, but not so far its a huge pain to get to.

And bellow that we have all the space where you can't use the FTL system to fast travel: you don't want to do so in random battle, because doing so in a solar system will just yeet you to your death in the void if your not positioned correctly. Which also means piracy has more opportunity, because just running away actually is hard, while a pirate with a good plan can actually have an escape plan to jump out of, even if the jump is unoptimal: maybe a slower trip home than ideal. Thus, you can easily have sublight, normal ish speed space combat and maneuvers, and its not a question why FTL is not used all the time, which I recall was a bit of a question in Mass Effect that gets handwaved a little pit.

And even more remote places that are too small to provide acceleration or breaking to a Jump Drive. Cere's for example is not small object, it is after all a dwarf planet, but with an escape velocity of 0.5 km/s, it would have to be reached a conventional way: 100 km/s is very good speed for current ships, but a bit conservative for science fiction. Such a craft would take roughly 50 days to reach Ceres from the Sun. A proper little adventure. Better make sure you have enough food and fuel to get there, do what you want, and get back. Put your survival and planning skills to the test, because there's no easy jump out if things go wrong.

Still, this all would seem so much better than what's actually in the game, giving people something to think about and a way to make different areas, well, different.

That's probably enough fan fiction in this thread for today though.
 
This made me crack up:



When they are gorgeous they really are.

I was just wandering a planet and this is what it looked like shortly after sunrise:
View attachment 1784

The morning fog just starting to burn off, the shadows on the hills. It was breathtaking.
Oh yeah, at sunset and sunrise, the global illumination looks great. At midday, not so much.

OMG, flat:

20230912153507-1.jpg


Otherwise, I think that's a fair review. I actually think you might have undersold the shipbuilding system a bit. I actually like it better than Empyrion's to be perfectly honest. Yes, Empyrion's is more powerful and you can design many more styles of ship, but it's also so fiddly that actually building those ships in game takes hours and hours of work and you have to do every little part of it. Meanwhile Starfield's system lets you put together something that looks pretty cool and works, though you're absolutely right about the interior maze issue. I found the best way to handle that was basically to make single floor ships:

View attachment 1785
Like my, well, Romulan Warbird inspired design here.
I used to build big ships in Starmade. Like, really big. Like kilometer-long behemoths with tens of millions of blocks big. They were so big, the mess halls were more like banquet halls. Being restricted to 80 meter gunboats made out of snap-together prefabs is a major step down from that.

Starmade is pretty dead nowadays, though. The last patch was like a few years ago. Space Engineers is fun, but it has some restrictions to its building mechanisms, too, and building a survival-ready, full-conveyor ship is tricky. It's been a while since I built an actual ship in SE; last time I was playing it, I was mostly building mining rovers in survival mode. I built one 5x5 small grid rover that could collect like 300 tons of ore in a single go and had a skid-steer mode for maneuverability in underground tunnels.

20230919211544-1.jpg

20230919211558-1.jpg


Another game that lets you make super-huge ships and vehicles is Starship EVO (I was a Kickstarter backer for that one, back when it was called Skywanderers). And then, of course, there's also Avorion. But Starship EVO is kind of just a sandbox without anything to really do in it, and Avorion doesn't let you walk around your ship.

Decisions, decisions.

Here's hoping that DLC or mods for Starfield add buildable stations and pilotable capital ships (just flying from station to station and landing on uninhabited planets, without landing on landing pads and having ugly clipping as a result). There are actually hidden capital ship parts in the game already.



 
I really dislike when RPG's have 'no-brainer' choices.
Like if you were playing an RPG and a starting perk is like "+100% HP, no downsides" you'd basically always pick it.
Starfield is full of them, and equally full of noob-traps.

"Good" starting traits.
-Adoring fan (upgradable companion who never complains, and he's free!)
-Wanted (Bonus damage when you are wounded, at minimal and usually ignored cost of bounty hunters showing up)
-Taskmaster (bonus to repair when your ship is damaged and you have the right crew on your ship)
"Bad" starting traits
-Alien DNA (Bonus health is completely worthless as it's a flat +50, bonus oxygen is nice because you can't upgrade that very easily, but now your food/medicine are worse...)
-Every other fucking trait is worthless

Nothing beats starting as a UC native-born, only for the very first UC person I talk to saying "Lmao you were born in the UC? That doesn't mean ANYTHING! You have to serve in the military for 8 years to be a citizen jej"

What the fuck is the point of the 'native X' traits when they do nothing? All they add is flavor text.
 
I really dislike when RPG's have 'no-brainer' choices.
Like if you were playing an RPG and a starting perk is like "+100% HP, no downsides" you'd basically always pick it.
Starfield is full of them, and equally full of noob-traps.

"Good" starting traits.
-Adoring fan (upgradable companion who never complains, and he's free!)
-Wanted (Bonus damage when you are wounded, at minimal and usually ignored cost of bounty hunters showing up)
-Taskmaster (bonus to repair when your ship is damaged and you have the right crew on your ship)
"Bad" starting traits
-Alien DNA (Bonus health is completely worthless as it's a flat +50, bonus oxygen is nice because you can't upgrade that very easily, but now your food/medicine are worse...)
-Every other fucking trait is worthless

Nothing beats starting as a UC native-born, only for the very first UC person I talk to saying "Lmao you were born in the UC? That doesn't mean ANYTHING! You have to serve in the military for 8 years to be a citizen jej"

What the fuck is the point of the 'native X' traits when they do nothing? All they add is flavor text.
Starfield is an interesting shooter, but a bad RPG. They emphasize how the game supports a variety of different builds, but it really doesn't. Didn't take the boost pack perk? You're utterly hobbled in vertical environments. Some POIs are really vertical, like one mine shaft with a boss at the bottom. Didn't take multiple levels in Starship Design? Good luck getting utterly shit on in space combat. There are so few non-ballistic weapons, and melee weapon stat growth sucks so much, you can play through the entire game with just a few perks in ballistic and no other combat perks. In fact, the only perks that really matter at all are Persuasion, Security, boost packing, and the tech tree ones that gate access to weapon mods and ship modules.

This game would have lost pretty much nothing by eschewing stats, levels, loot rarity, and perks entirely, and just given the player a flat set of weapons and abilities with fixed stats, like GTA or RDR, with a tech tree for unlocking ship parts and weapon mods, but then it would have lost the "lemme get just ONE MORE LEVEL" appeal.
 
Last edited:
This game would have lost pretty much nothing by eschewing stats, levels, loot rarity, and perks entirely, and just given the player a flat set of weapons and abilities with fixed stats, like GTA or RDR, with a tech tree for unlocking ship parts and weapon mods, but then it would have lost the "lemme get just ONE MORE LEVEL" appeal.
I get that feel as well. If the game had like 10 planets, condensed quests, and maybe Mass Effect 1-esque levelling, the game would be way way better.
Its abominable that a modern 'RPG' has the same weapons 10 minutes in, be the same weapons you get 80 hours in lmao.
Imagine playing Fallout 1 and the second final quest gave you a 10mm Pistol.
 
I get that feel as well. If the game had like 10 planets, condensed quests, and maybe Mass Effect 1-esque levelling, the game would be way way better.
Its abominable that a modern 'RPG' has the same weapons 10 minutes in, be the same weapons you get 80 hours in lmao.
Imagine playing Fallout 1 and the second final quest gave you a 10mm Pistol.
The loot in this game sucks. I hate raiding a dozen POIs and getting MAD DEADLY POISONOUS RADIOACTIVE DEMORALIZING USELESS SHIV every single time. My cargo hold is full of Ripshanks that will never rip or shank anything.

If I'd designed the game, I would have made it so that clutter could not be picked up and placed in your inventory. There would be no item rarity system or legendary weapons or anything like that; weapons would have fixed stats like FO3/NV. Items would not have weight; instead, you'd have a sidearm slot and two primary weapon slots, and that's it. Crafting materials would be utterly abstracted and weightless. You pick up iron, it increments an iron counter in your inventory hud, becomes weightless, and disappears as a physical object. Ship cargo space would be used exclusively for trading, and there would be a real economy with fluctuating prices. All of the outpost storage space for resources would be linked together, and all it would do is increase the material cap in your HUD. Building cargo links would not physically move resources from one outpost to another, but enable all outposts to directly access each other's resources like they were a single chest. I would have stripped away and streamlined every single annoying thing. I also would have made it so that hitting ESC instantly closes the menus no matter which layer you're on.
 
The loot in this game sucks. I hate raiding a dozen POIs and getting MAD DEADLY POISONOUS RADIOACTIVE DEMORALIZING USELESS SHIV every single time. My cargo hold is full of Ripshanks that will never rip or shank anything.
PFFFTTT. XD

Same fucking shit happened to me!
I swear 80% of my legendary items were fucking shivs, axes, and swords. All of which suck ass because melee was an obvious afterthought in the game.
 
Starfield is an interesting shooter, but a bad RPG. They emphasize how the game supports a variety of different builds, but it really doesn't. Didn't take the boost pack perk? You're utterly hobbled in vertical environments. Some POIs are really vertical, like one mine shaft with a boss at the bottom. Didn't take multiple levels in Starship Design? Good luck getting utterly shit on in space combat. There are so few non-ballistic weapons, and melee weapon stat growth sucks so much, you can play through the entire game with just a few perks in ballistic and no other combat perks. In fact, the only perks that really matter at all are Persuasion, Security, boost packing, and the tech tree ones that gate access to weapon mods and ship modules.

This game would have lost pretty much nothing by eschewing stats, levels, loot rarity, and perks entirely, and just given the player a flat set of weapons and abilities with fixed stats, like GTA or RDR, with a tech tree for unlocking ship parts and weapon mods, but then it would have lost the "lemme get just ONE MORE LEVEL" appeal.
Yeah, they really screwed up between the game's design and what the gameplay was sold as.
It was meant to be an AAA exploration/colonization focused competitor to all the open world survival games with space theme.
But instead it's a Fallout IN SPACE!!! where you are an errand boy for random people most don't even care about because it's not Fallout but a new setting meant as background for the advertised exploration/colonization focused game, which is a role it may even be good enough for.

This creates a case of the common "ludonarrative dissonance" where you're the owner of a small interstellar colonial initiative and even a small fleet of starships, yet at the same time have to do minor errands and struggle to get a slightly better gun and armor like if you were some random traveling wastelander in a post apocalyptic world who definitely can't get a moon buggy to drive his ass around...

I think Starsector's exploration gameplay and early-mid game questing would be a very good inspiration for how Starfield should do these things.
 
Quick question. Do you need Base Engineering skill to set up a base? I know I bitched about it earlier but I'm not sure if you can or can't do it based on what I've seen on Youtube.
 
Quick question. Do you need Base Engineering skill to set up a base? I know I bitched about it earlier but I'm not sure if you can or can't do it based on what I've seen on Youtube.
To set up the initial base, no. To make the base extensive and useful, yes.
 
Making any sort of long-term investment such as bases, ships, gear, etc, seems like a waste because-
You fucking lose it ALL once you do NG+, potentially wasting tens of hours of gameplay...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top