Starfield: Floating Arms Simulator

[Garlic Buddha]

Starfield has no visible body or cast shadow for the main character, why?

I like when games let you see your clothing/armor choices in first person. GTA 5 and Cyberpunk 2077 do this well, hell, even star citizen does it too. In my opinion, realizing that you're a floating pair of arms in all Bethesda games is un-immersive as hell.

a visible first person body/shadow has been modded into fallout 4/skse in the past, so its not impossible for the creation engine. so why doesnt bethesda want to do it then?

i made a YT video about this: https://youtu.be/O7fKLzJ9tag

EDIT: i was right, starfield has no visualized 1st person body, shadow, and certain weapons such as pistols and melee weapons do not appear on your body.

[Garlic Buddha]

Gamefever a écrit :

Uh, an actual working immersive first person was never produced for Fallout 4.

there has been a few to the best of my knowledge.....

First Person Camera - See Your Body - 100k DLs - (last updated in 2017) - by yoraphcool
https://mods.bethesda.net/en/fallout4/mod-detail/4036393

True First person Camera - 32k DLs - (last updated in 2021) - by Valentina22
https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/56590

Almost Realistic Immersive First-Person View Camera - 12k DLs (last updated in 2023) by RosyPlay
https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/71170

the thing is that Fallout 4/76s 3rd person animations are different from Skyrim and older titles.... this is because when you walk backwards in fallout 3/NV and skyrim you start back pedaling or jogging backwards... but in fallout 4/76 you do a 180 and start running towards the camera. so making a immersive 1st person mod for fallout 4 is much more difficult than just sticking the third person camera in your head which would work for previous titles.... imo the 180 ♥♥♥♥ is unnecessary. And you cant even walk backwards without aiming a gun so you can do less with the new animation system added to fallout 4/76 than you can in Skyrim and older titles. i think they should get rid of this system or fix the 1st person body animations like modders have. Bethesda just keeps on sweeping it under the rug.

[Garlic Buddha]

Mu'Ammar of Carthus a écrit :

Good thing I absolutely never planned on playing in 1st person.

Hell, would've been a straight "no buy" if 3rd person wasn't available like some people claimed a while back.

I plan on using both.

[Garlic Buddha]

halfmonkey a écrit :

I don't mind not seeing a player body (or even feet) in first person. I do however find it vaguely disturbing when the player doesn't cast shadows. I'm sure in a few months there will be a mod that combines a headless 3rd person body, or whatever, to replicate this, but the "Immersive First Person" mod for Fallout 4 always broke other systems for me.

More irritating than this (to me) is the floating arms in most games these days seem to be always on screen. Screen real estate seems dominated by your poised weapon instead of a natural view.
Running around with your hands held up high enough to be in your general scope of vision is ridiculous. (Fallout and Skyrim were both made better with a "lowered weapon" mod, IMO.)

oh for sure... lowered weapons made specifically FO4 waay better because in that game putting away your gun just makes it disappear into thin air, at least in skyrim your weapon appears on your body/back.... hopefully they brought that feature back completely (because in the starfield direct i didnt see any hip holstered pistols, but i did see backpack mounted rifles so maybe?) and hopefully they added a new lowered weapon animation.

as for the FO4 immersive 1st person mod... the FO4's 3rd person animation is different from older titles.... in Skyrim and older games, pressing the "S" key will just make you back pedal towards the camera... but in FO4 pressing the "S" key will make you do a 180 and run towards the camera. in my opinion this is an unnecessary mechanic (that restricts movements because you can no longer back pedal without aiming in FO4) and is largely the reason that the FO4 immersive camera mods were harder to develop and were used less.

[Tenoshii]

Rhila a écrit :

be ready for the angry fans to attack you and accuse you of the worst things possible.

Well you've done a great job of giving them examples of how to do this to Bethesda and anyone who isn't criticizing Bethesda.

Rhila a écrit :

people think it doesn't matter because the game is missing more important things like ground vehicles

Funny how there hasn't been anyone playing the game who is actually sharing this concern.

[Garlic Buddha]

I'm the walrus a écrit :

fov slider wont be in the game afaik

but you can always open the console and type fov 90

it just works

this ♥♥♥♥ aged like milk. so much for custom fovs with the console commands "fov 100" and "fov 100 100" dont work for Starfield. i think it was the "it just works" you said... you jinxed it like todd jinxed F76

[LivedOnce]

Cellar_Cat a écrit :

If I had to guess, they might have had issues with the bulk of the spacesuits. Either the FPS view would actually be seeing out of your helmet and thus potentially quite restricted (plus they'd need to develop that part of the helmet more); or it would need to be far from your face to be outside the helmet, and have an impact on your perception of where you are standing; or they hide the helmet from the player and show the suit, which results in you seeing into the open top of the suit where the helmet would connect.

I suspect with Cyberpunk that would not become an issue since (IIRC) the clothing and even armour is more form fitting.

But, that's just speculation. I guess when modders try it we'll see if those issues materialise.

If I had to guess, it's because Bethesda just decided to release a re-skin of skyrim.

Garlic Buddha a écrit :

I'm the walrus a écrit :

fov slider wont be in the game afaik

but you can always open the console and type fov 90

it just works

this ♥♥♥♥ aged like milk. so much for custom fovs with the console commands "fov 100" and "fov 100 100" dont work for Starfield. i think it was the "it just works" you said... you jinxed it like todd jinxed F76 :laughing_yeti:

This entire thread filled with fanboys and shills aged like milk. It's the same problems we had 12 years ago... Except, now there is no excuse.

[Garlic Buddha]

TheLivedOnce a écrit :

Cellar_Cat a écrit :

If I had to guess, they might have had issues with the bulk of the spacesuits. Either the FPS view would actually be seeing out of your helmet and thus potentially quite restricted (plus they'd need to develop that part of the helmet more); or it would need to be far from your face to be outside the helmet, and have an impact on your perception of where you are standing; or they hide the helmet from the player and show the suit, which results in you seeing into the open top of the suit where the helmet would connect.

I suspect with Cyberpunk that would not become an issue since (IIRC) the clothing and even armour is more form fitting.

But, that's just speculation. I guess when modders try it we'll see if those issues materialise.

If I had to guess, it's because Bethesda just decided to release a re-skin of skyrim.

Garlic Buddha a écrit :

this ♥♥♥♥ aged like milk. so much for custom fovs with the console commands "fov 100" and "fov 100 100" dont work for Starfield. i think it was the "it just works" you said... you jinxed it like todd jinxed F76

This entire thread filled with fanboys and shills aged like milk. It's the same problems we had 12 years ago... Except, now there is no excuse.

I think its very telling that ign rated this game a 7/10 or pretty much a "C" if it was a grade. this game, in my own opinion, is not satisfying the fans who are still waiting for a ES6 or fallout 5 release for longer than a decade. just like fallout 76 didn't satisfy anyone for longer than 5 seconds... ive personally lost a lot of faith in future Bethesda titles from this release... and notably for more reasons than just not having a body/shadow.