Starfield gets a 4.7 user score on metacritic

[BornToKill]

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/starfield

Thoughts?
Personally i think its a bit harsh. 5-6 would have been alright.

[Seekrt]

Originally posted by Seekrt:

Originally posted by Hyokkuda:

Cyberpunk 2077 can still put an RTX 4090 to its knees with everything set to Ultra,

I am calling BS.
I run I7-11700f, 48gig ddr4 3200 ram rtx3080 and I get 70+ fps with raytracing on ultra everything on ultra-high and dlss performance in Cyberpunk.

And that is in 3440*1440.

[EleventhStar]

Originally posted by Dumblemort:

Steam's reviews are actually much less accurate than often even Metacritic, because Steam does either 100% or 0% reviews, and if 90% of people think a game is just a bit above average or are fans of the game, they will leave positive (100%) review, inflating the real score to like 80%, which would be like 60% if people could choose their rating more precisely.

Check this video out, this is also how Rotten Tomatoes does it, and it's not actually accurate at all like 95% of the time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQyKpOJhUKY

you make the mistake thinking that reviews are there for the consumer.

they are not, they are there to create more sales on the platform.

any benefit to the consumer is secondary.

in general this leads to score that are a bit more positive than they should be, but for your average that doesn't matter.
it mostly means that if a rating is mixed/negative, it's for a good reason and there actually is something going on with that game you should check out before buying.

[Luizard]

Originally posted by Krankbert:

Originally posted by Luizard:

Because people are already bored with exploring empty planets they don't run into invisible walls so frequently.

No, you lying dillweed, because the zones are big enough that you never actually run into the border during normal gameplay. That's exactly my point about made-up criticism. You talk about the invisible border because you were told it's there, not because it something that you noticed and disliked. People like you are just anhedonic doomposters. You start out wanting to hate on the game, and everything else is just grasping for any justification you can find.

The planets have the same points of interest, there's no reason to explore them beyond the fast travel to planet> beeline for POI > fast travel out of planet. Maybe if you play the game more you will understand its loop. Hopefully mods can make exploration with vehicles and fun planets a reality in the future.

[DaninTexas]

Game is NOT a 10/10 or a 9/10. Any user score of a 0 through 4 out of 10? Really? Yeah all of those are trolls.

[Hyokkuda]

It seems you are stuck in 2018. Fallout 76 has improved a great deal since then. The reviews and the player-base is much bigger and better today. The developers have added a lot of content into the game to a point where it feels like a proper Fallout game now. But of course, people will continue to hate it, just like some will continue to say that Cyberpunk 2077 is a buggy mess and a disappointment to the game industry despite what the game has become today.

Originally posted by Luizard:

That's the way Bethesda operates and expect them to get worse now that Microsoft pays their bills. Fallout 76 and Starfield have both disappointed, if the next one isn't an improvement I expect them to go the way of Bioware under EA. Oh well, at least they still have Doom

[Luizard]

Originally posted by Hyokkuda:

I disagree. I have played this game for almost 200 hours, and I never hit the boundaries once. If you follow the scanner, this will not happen.

Why go towards an area without a lead anyway? -Unless you are planning on finding the perfect area to build an outpost or for hunting aliens hours on end, this will most likely be impossible without a goal in mind such as "Let's run straight for an hour".

I ran in a straight line for an hour in No Man Sky with the hope of finding something, and there was nothing for me to do. No points of interest, no artifact-language-tomb-thingy, nothing. Only a few angry aliens who were trying to bite my face off once in a while, not entertaining enough, and no reward for killing them either.

Originally posted by Luizard:

Because people are already bored with exploring empty planets they don't run into invisible walls so frequently. They really should've had vehicles in planets.

Exactly, people now know there's no reason to explore the empty planets except to go straight for the repeated Points of Interest. The invisible walls don't matter when you know the planets give the illusion of exploration. Hopefully mods will make better planets with actual exploration and vehicles.

[EleventhStar]

Originally posted by DaninTexas:

Game is NOT a 10/10 or a 9/10. Any user score of a 0 through 4 out of 10? Really? Yeah all of those are trolls.

i dunno i can easily see myself giving this game a <4 score if i was expecting skyrim in space or NMS or even just generic "fly around in space" game and didn't do any research to find out it wasn't that.

then again objectively speaking what should one rate it?
-can't get a passing grade cause it's not a game i want to play (bad exploration gameplay) so let's start with 5/10
-tons of non-ignorable bugs and performance issues 4/10
-maybe another -1 for just how creepy the npcs look? 3/10
-maybe another -1 if you want to treat lack of flying/driving/diving on planets as a seperate category from the exploration gameplay being ♥♥♥♥ 2/10

[Luizard]

Originally posted by Hyokkuda:

It seems you are stuck in 2018. Fallout 76 has improved a great deal since then. The reviews and the player-base is much bigger and better today. The developers have added a lot of content into the game to a point where it feels like a proper Fallout game now. But of course, people will continue to hate it, just like some will continue to say that Cyberpunk 2077 is a buggy mess and a disappointment to the game industry despite what the game has become today.

Originally posted by Luizard:

That's the way Bethesda operates and expect them to get worse now that Microsoft pays their bills. Fallout 76 and Starfield have both disappointed, if the next one isn't an improvement I expect them to go the way of Bioware under EA. Oh well, at least they still have Doom

At least Cyberpunk actually excelled in graphics and story when it came out as a buggy mess, Starfield does nothing particularly well. The ship building is nice, but since the ship has no use apart from inventory space and the mobile game tier space combat it's a missed opportunity. Modders will probably make it good, just gotta be patient

[enderbeta]

Originally posted by Seekrt:

Originally posted by Hyokkuda:

Cyberpunk 2077 can still put an RTX 4090 to its knees with everything set to Ultra,

I am calling BS.
I run I7-11700f, 48gig ddr4 3200 ram rtx3080 and I get 70+ fps with raytracing on ultra everything on ultra-high and dlss performance in Cyberpunk.

Yeah right, not with the new ray tracing update and certainly not without leaning on DLSS heavily.

[Marosh]

Originally posted by Tiasmoon:

Originally posted by nowhere man:

I'm not "making things up", if you couldnt get my sarcasm, it is a criticism about the incremental simplification of the RPG elements that bethesda do with every new release. Done, ok, you ruined it, I explained it in the literal sense.

This game has more actual ''roleplaying'' then previous Bethesda games.

That is also the problem. People that are unable or unwilling to roleplay, miss out on most of the Starfield experience. Without the immersion of roleplay, this game's experience is unsurprisingly not nearly as good.

What? We must play different games. The only choice the player has is doing the mission or ignoring it completly. You can't even fail most of them.
Big anti-corpa me gets an inventation to the big corpa faction. Roleplay me thinks "lets ♥♥♥♥ them up till they fire me, I help the farmer". I do everything wrong, killed people I should negotiate with (unless they are essential which so simply can't kill), told them how bad I am, tried to refuse a mission, ruined their big corpa project and so on. Yes, I went overboard because I couldn't believe they praised me over and over again. How far have I to go before they kick me out. My reward? Promotion, promotion, promotion till I was the top dog of the corpa.

Or other quests. Someone asks for help, I don't care or say no, he explains the mission, plop, new mission.

The meme:
Yes (yes)
maybe (yes)
sarcastic yes (yes)
no (yes)
was never stronger than this before. Doing a mission or ignoring it, because you can't fail it is not really roleplay in 2023 anymore. Escpecially from a AAA studio.

Then remove atleast the dialogue options and put the freed ressources towards better writing if they all have exact same outcome. No need for 4 different yes.
Not even in FO4 was I so baffled about the illusion of choice. And that game invented the meme.

You said without the immersion of roleplay, the game experience isn't nearly as good. I would say the opposite unless you play the typical good guy hero. Roleplay anything else and you hit boundries left and right. The only roleplay option you have is leaving the quest rot in your questlog.

[Tiasmoon]

Originally posted by Luizard:

they didn't even try to innovate and actually regressed on many fronts.

Its really evident you guys never played this game.

Originally posted by Luizard:

Because people are already bored with exploring empty planets they don't run into invisible walls so frequently. They really should've had vehicles in planets.

Anyone that plays the game knows the ''invis wall'' isnt remotely an issue for 99.999% of players.

[Cadaver]

Im much more inclined dto trust steams user score since its a llot harder to randomly reviewbomb by people just hating on the game for irrelevant things like "pronouns" (not perfect but better) however, give it a few days, it will balance out as more people review it, its already up to 5.2

It's just that a lot of people who feel weirdly emotional will slap on a 1 early which tanks a score in the beginning a lot more than over time

[Hyokkuda]

That is completely impossible because I have slightly higher specs than you and the game will not run above 60 with Ray Tracing Overdrive Mode in a lot of areas in 2K. Maybe you are thinking of your experience before the big graphical updates. Only an RTX 3090 can run it with Overdrive and that is the bare minimum according to the developers. And if I am not mistaken, the RTX 3080 cannot benefit from the new DLSS, only 3090 cards and 4000 series.

Originally posted by Seekrt:

I am calling BS.
I run I7-11700f, 48gig ddr4 3200 ram rtx3080 and I get 70+ fps with raytracing on ultra everything on ultra-high and dlss performance in Cyberpunk.

[Tiasmoon]

Originally posted by Otter:

Holy cope in this thread.
When Anthem got a terrible user rating - "Yeah deserved, the game is boring and lacks content"
When Elden Ring got applauded for bringing what the fans want and rated highly - "We gaming now peeps, GOTY material"

Shartfield gets a mid score - "NOOOOOO NOT LIKE THAT!!"

StarSissies on 24 hour obs for suicide watch

https://twitter.com/StarfieldGame/status/1699905388542398474

I agree that you guys really are coping to some truly hardcore extents. I have never seen a reviewbomb continue for so long, and have so little practical effect.

[Lazerfocusing]

Originally posted by BornToKill:

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/starfield

Thoughts?
Personally i think its a bit harsh. 5-6 would have been alright.

Just non-owners crying. No one cares.