Is Starfield really that bad?

[Random Space Marine]

I'm sure this was already asked before. But aside from the fact that people are angry about the Creation Club (CC) shenanigan, I've seen a few people talk about bugs, missed opportunities, and other issues.

Is it really unsalvageable? Or is there still some hope left for this game?

[EdgeOfTomorrow]

they call it starfield because there is nothing on the 1000 planets.

fans will lie to you and claim the game is a 8/10 or 10/10 and a masterpiece.

well before the CC and after the actual release you can tell 20 hours in the price tag just does not match the games content and quality unless you live a boring existance and enjoy dull mindless content.

[CurrySpirals]

Are you woke? You’ll love it.

Are you anti-woke? You’ll hate it.

Are you normal? It’s ok.

[Umakurokoto]

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: It's actually pretty good, and now the Creation Kit is out.

[Sprocket66]

It's not that bad. It's just not that good. They hyped the game like it was the second coming and it turned out to be mid. So a lot of the customers felt catfished.

[YouTube.com/StoneLegion]

If long answer is to say modding exists it's better then no the game sucks. Modding just makes it better.

[katzenkrimis]

Originally posted by Random Space Marine:

I'm sure this was already asked before.

Unsalvageable?

A million times.

It's not the question that you are asking, it's the timing of it.

This game won't attract more people until more content is added. Like all of Howard's games, you'll have to suck it up and be patient for a another year or two.

Took four years for the Cyberpunk cynics, which was almost everybody that played it on release day, to suddenly crawl out of their man-caves and start bragging about how wonderful it is.

I can give you more examples of recent games that did the exact same thing. This game will be no different. No need to convince you to buy it. Just come back in a couple of years and you'll see.

One day you read a post or watch a video and you'll think to yourself, What? People like Starfield now?

[EdgeOfTomorrow]

Originally posted by katzenkrimis:

Originally posted by Random Space Marine:

I'm sure this was already asked before.

Unsalvageable?

A million times.

It's not the question that you are asking, it's the timing of it.

This game won't attract more people until more content is added. Like all of Howard's games, you'll have to suck it up and be patient for a another year or two.

Took four years for the Cyberpunk cynics, which was almost everybody that played it on release day, to suddenly crawl out of their man-caves and start bragging about how wonderful it is.

I can give you more examples of recent games that did the exact same thing. This game will be no different. No need to convince you to buy it. Just come back in a couple of years and you'll see.

One day you read a post or watch a video and you'll think to yourself, What? People like Starfield now?

but but but the 1000 planets to explore and the game is a 10/10? how can it be so empty and shallow

[Umakurokoto]

Originally posted by YouTube.com/StoneLegion:

If long answer is to say modding exists it's better then no the game sucks. Modding just makes it better.

Yeah, but that isn't the case. The game is already good, and modding makes it better.

[too2fun]

It's good if you use Vortex instead of the creation Kit

[Umakurokoto]

Originally posted by too2fun:

It's good if you use Vortex instead of the creation Kit

The kit is just the toolbox to make mods, creation club is the installer/mod-manager that many aren't fond of.

[Mick Savage]

If you don't like exploration or playing around with the economy, you might like it.

It's beyond boring for many of us, it would have been a great title for 30 bucks then add content every year with DLC's. Instead they chose to fill their game using modders and that will take time, with the current revolt against paid mods, it could take a lot of time.

[Bad Brad]

It's even worse than people say it is. Make sure you keep track of the time you play it so you can get your refund. I think you only get an hour now.

[Matra]

Imagine you wanted to go mountain biking. You load up your bike, drive out to a place, hike to the top of the trail, make sure your helmet is secure, your tires are inflated, you have water. You're prepared to make a day of it. You get on the trail and it's a perfectly smooth, perfectly straight, slight downhill from start to finish.

That's Starfield. It doesn't do anything exciting, has no interesting characters or quests or mechanics, no challenging fights or moral dilemmas. Going downhill can be fun. That's why children love slides. But it's not more than that.

[Langkard]

Originally posted by Random Space Marine:

I'm sure this was already asked before. But aside from the fact that people are angry about the Creation Club (CC) shenanigan, I've seen a few people talk about bugs, missed opportunities, and other issues.

Is it really unsalvageable? Or is there still some hope left for this game?

It's fun. There are no Creation Club "shenanigans" except in the minds of people who are desperate for reasons to hate the game. You might want to rethink a reliance upon the sketchy sources you've used for information on the game.

[vonbleak]

Its a pretty fun, solid game - Its just different to past BGS games in certain ways, and depending on how you approach and feel about those changes will influence what you might ultimately think...

The exploration is really spread out and while there are 1000 planets and all of that none of them really have the lived in and living feel of the older more hand crafted worlds, from the previous games... So you need to get your head around this...

This was probably my biggest pill to swallow - personally i would have preferred far less planets if it meant they were more detailed and living...

But that aside - SF is still a very good game - Its just not a smash hit classic like Skyrim was... And i think with more updates/dlc/expansions and of course mods - there is a bright future for it ahead...