Todd: "Its several Games in one"!

[M]

hey community.

a while ago, Todd Howard said, starfield will be several games in one. aha, and what was RDR2 then, in comparison? I highly doubt, that starfield will REALLY have any minigame, that even deserves the name, like space poker or NASA punk chess minigames you can always return to, just like red dead redemption 2 provided. with Todds logic, RDR2 was every game except base building.

if I find any "real" minigame in starfield, except hacking and lock picking, pls act as if I didnt wrote this post. but regarding past bethesda releases, such as skyrim or fallout 4, I would be highly confused to find minigames in starfield.

I mean, how much effort can it even be? they can use the ruleset of existing games, modify it a bit and we are through. I dont get it.

[Daedrius]

The exact quote-

"You could say, in some respect, Starfield is like five or six games in one, right? It’s the spaceship game, it’s the on the ground game, it’s the dialogue game, it’s the outpost game, it’s the crafting game… It does all of these things."

You have to realize this dude loves making games and seems to get excited talking about the games they are working on. So, he doesn't literally mean it's like 5 different games, more like there's many different aspects of game play. Which, I understand.

[Deadoon]

Several games in one can mean multiple things.

One being distinct environments without significant shared equipment or playstyles. We do have ship based combat as well as infantry combat. That logic can be applied to a game like warthunder which is a tank combat game, an aerial combat game, and a naval combat game, with only limited overlap between these elements. You can play purely in one of them without really interacting with the others.
It also has colony management which has additional functions significantly more developed than the fo4 settlements, though I don't really consider than an entirely different thing, rather a supportive side excursion to other stuff, but opinions might differ.

[2StinkyFeet]

It's not explicit in general, but games defined by a developer is not the considered games by the general smooth brain consumers. Video games are made with a collections interwoven small scale systems that requires a lot of designing. It's just that you people just can't really understand them or considered them games.

it's the idea that people in general like the people in steam forums can only eat but don't have any intellectual on how to cook or even the process of cooking. Just eat and sh1t and masterbate.

For example the inventory system in res 4 would be consider a small game by developers. But by itself it's not really anything special yet people who like to organized things enjoys it because it's FUN.

What our lord and savior is saying is that the game is made up a bunch of small system that works together to form a more enjoyable experiences that they think would be able to sell to the consumers.

Starfield have shown that it has stuff like base building, ship building, fetch quests, character building, pick pocketing, lock picking, space vehicle flying, space flight combat, character creation, dating simulator, gun fighting, and last of all they will be providing the creation kit; allowing modders to create things, which in itself is a game of itself.

[M]

apparently some ppl didnt get it. ah, well, apparently some ppl can only eat, but dont know, how to cook.

in my opinion, Todd claimed boldly, that starfield contains several games. but it prolly doesnt even contain ONE. SINGLE. MINIGAME. that is perceived by a casual gamer as a real "fun game" like billard, chess or cards game.

[Jernej]

Another one who don't understand what Todd is saying. People must learn to listen.

[Glemt]

Originally posted by M:

apparently some ppl didnt get it. ah, well, apparently some ppl can only eat, but dont know, how to cook.

in my opinion, Todd claimed boldly, that starfield contains several games. but it prolly doesnt even contain ONE. SINGLE. MINIGAME. that is perceived by a casual gamer as a real "fun game" like billard, chess or cards game.

Is what you mean Todd said different from the quote Ezeris posted (repeated below)?

Yes > please provide us with the quote.
No > Ezeris is right, and you are the one that doesn't get it. So in your analogy, you can eat but you can't cook.

Expanding on what Ezeris said, the reason Todd said it like this is because back in the 90's and before, you could barely make games that had different gameplay loops. You had Space Sims where you flew a spaceship, you had RPGs where you explored the ground (mostly top down), or you had shooters, or crafting (RTS or SIM). Rarely did you have multiple, and not at all at the level which you get now.

And yeah, if you follow Todds words, RDR2 would indeed be multiple games in one, but not because of the minigames. It has RPG elements, action elements, is a shooter, has dialogue options, world exploration, and even to some extent management.

Nowadays, games that just have the one genre in them are rare. That's why games could used to be labelled "action game" or "rpg", and now are labelled "open world action RPG with roguelite elements and basebuilding".

Originally posted by Ezeris:

The exact quote-

"You could say, in some respect, Starfield is like five or six games in one, right? It’s the spaceship game, it’s the on the ground game, it’s the dialogue game, it’s the outpost game, it’s the crafting game… It does all of these things."

[Darth Revan]

Originally posted by M:

apparently some ppl didnt get it. ah, well, apparently some ppl can only eat, but dont know, how to cook.

in my opinion, Todd claimed boldly, that starfield contains several games. but it prolly doesnt even contain ONE. SINGLE. MINIGAME. that is perceived by a casual gamer as a real "fun game" like billard, chess or cards game.

lol so you are deliberately taking him out of context and claim he meant something that he did not mean at all just like all the people do with the "it just works" and with the "16 times the detail".

great, that tells a lot about you.

[Gamefever]

Originally posted by Ezeris:

The exact quote-

"You could say, in some respect, Starfield is like five or six games in one, right? It’s the spaceship game, it’s the on the ground game, it’s the dialogue game, it’s the outpost game, it’s the crafting game… It does all of these things."

You have to realize this dude loves making games and seems to get excited talking about the games they are working on. So, he doesn't literally mean it's like 5 different games, more like there's many different aspects of game play. Which, I understand.

Uh no,
Some of us remember the Atari a game console that literally had like 4 color display.
So given Todd was older than that even, probably played the first dungeons and dragons text based crawlers that were built and perhaps the first "video game".
I think it is safe to say, it is 5 or 6 games rolled into one.

Although on this forum, probably more people remember something like the original Nintendo, back then you stuck in a cartridge and well it was only one type of gameplay loop rather than in my modded games something like 50 gameplay loops all going on.

[M]

Originally posted by Legatus Lucanus:

Originally posted by M:

apparently some ppl didnt get it. ah, well, apparently some ppl can only eat, but dont know, how to cook.

in my opinion, Todd claimed boldly, that starfield contains several games. but it prolly doesnt even contain ONE. SINGLE. MINIGAME. that is perceived by a casual gamer as a real "fun game" like billard, chess or cards game.

lol so you are deliberately taking him out of context and claim he meant something that he did not mean at all just like all the people do with the "it just works" and with the "16 times the detail".

great, that tells a lot about you.

Im not "talking him out of context", Im just saying, that starfield will prolly not have minigames, just like skyrim, FO4 and all the other bethesda titles, where RDR2 had it.

and I mentioned it only, because you can play hogswarts legacy and watch the castle get more empty and meaningless, the more you make progress. in the end, it becomes a scenery with no interaction. where I always like to return to RDR2 and may it be just for a game of poker.

its not enough to make a "big world" and tell ppl to play. as a gamedev, you also have to offer ppl something that is interesting and makes players want to come back and I think, some minigames could help a lot.

[Ailedroc]

I stay away from games that are filled with mini-games.

They'll call games "open world", but all it is, is a big map filled with the same mini-games all over it. You go to one place on the map to do one mini-game, then you go to another spot to do a different mini-game, and then you go to another spot to do the same mini-game. That gameplay loop repeats.

I like games that give me something deep for the main core gameplay, not lots of little extra crap.

Originally posted by Ezeris:

more like there's many different aspects of game play. Which, I understand.

I'm not sure I quite get the point of this discussion. This has been going on for 40 years with video games. You get lots of gameplay elements going on in a game. If you know your old school games, then you know how amazing the older games can be.

I don't know why this needs to be some big thing or needs to be acted like it's something new. Just sounds to me like a thread full of fanboys trying to attack someone.

[¥]

Originally posted by Jernej:

Another one who don't understand what Todd is saying. People must learn to listen.

Does Todd understand what he is saying?

Because, to be honest, he sounds like he is reading a pre-prepared statement from the marketing department...

16 TIMES THE DETAIL

[dannyj147]

Originally posted by ¥:

Originally posted by Jernej:

Another one who don't understand what Todd is saying. People must learn to listen.

Does Todd understand what he is saying?

Because, to be honest, he sounds like he is reading a pre-prepared statement from the marketing department...

16 TIMES THE DETAIL

Crikey like other games companies don't use marketing tactics to generate sales.

[moody]

My question is whether there is going to enough ships to go and shoot at? Will ships keep respawning enough for us to grind on?

enough enemies to find and battle? Same with ships. If we want to just go and grind some shooting and killing can we leave and area and come back and enemies will be there again to kill?

how detailed and meaningful will an outpost be? what can I really do inside? Stare at a couch? talk to the same npc over and over again?

Will ship building makes a difference? will there be a point of building a ship that is out of the ordinary or just be beneficial to make a ship that is balanced and leave it alone?

I get the feeling some of these things are going to get boring after a few hours once we find optimal ways of building and grinding.

[Tenoshii]

Originally posted by M:

a while ago, Todd Howard said, starfield will be several games in one. aha, and what was RDR2 then, in comparison? I highly doubt, that starfield will REALLY have any minigame, that even deserves the name, like space poker or NASA punk chess minigames you can always return to, just like red dead redemption 2 provided. with Todds logic, RDR2 was every game except base building.

There are a handful of mini-games in Starfield.:

• Survey mini-game when you have acquired the appropriate skill
  
• R&D mini-game when developing new drugs
  
• Puzzle mini-game when deciphering certain alien artifacts
  
• Tracking mini-game as part of mid-late game bounty hunting
  
• Arcade machine mini-game in the pleasure city

Originally posted by M:

if I find any "real" minigame in starfield, except hacking and lock picking, pls act as if I didnt wrote this post. but regarding past bethesda releases, such as skyrim or fallout 4, I would be highly confused to find minigames in starfield.

Bethesda wants you to feel this way, that's why they haven't hinted at anything directly. They are serious about players being surprised at the things you can do.

Originally posted by M:

I mean, how much effort can it even be? they can use the ruleset of existing games, modify it a bit and we are through. I dont get it.

There are finite resources and time spend on the game. It doesn't matter how small a theoretical change is, there is still a limit to what they can do.

If 100 gamers all demand a "small" change made to a game, all of a sudden it's not a "small" change anymore.

[A. Silvermane]

Swiss army knife is like 7 or more tools in one with each of them being theoretically useful. Problem is that there is always that one tool you can never find a use for.