Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
1. Game is already a walking simulator ( before they added vehicles ) being able to walk in habs adds no value.
2. NPCs giving buffs is pointless anything can give buffs. The NPC value in the ship is purely a moving decoration. Even Fallout 4 NPCs at least pretended to interact with crafting stations. Here your ship could be under attack and they will happily sit around as if nothing is happening.
3. Minor NPC inconvenience? No, its called laziness, same with the contraband system using RNG. writing code for dice roll is easiest possible thing that could be done. They shouldn't even have added it if they were going to do something mediocre.
4. Gameplay value means you actually see them do gameplay. If they sit around doing nothing while everything happens - no it adds no value. They can be replaced with a perk and there will be 0 difference. They serve no value for existing.
Same thing with Crew habs. Whats the point in having a jail cell if there is no ability to transport prisoners? It exists purely for cosmetic reasons. The entire game exists purely for cosmetic reasons, everything and I mean everything in the game is superficial.
Final Nail in the Coffin;
There was 0 thought or time spent thinking about fleshing out any system.
The game was just cobbeled together with extreme basics and pushed.
1. Contraband system? RNG
2. Mining system? Walk around map holding a beacon
3. Human enemies? All use the exact same Ai with no unique strategies between factions. You could literally put same armor on all the enemy humans and never be able to tell what faction they are. Because each faction likes any unique personality. Even RAGE 1 and 2 had unique AI for each tribal faction.
4. Survival system? There could be a wind storm and I could literally be inside a closed building and I am still being affected.
5. Equipment Mod System? You can't even remove and exchange mods that you could do in previous games
6. Alien Fauna? 99.9% of all allien fauna has one attack. They rush you and bop you with your head.
7. Enviromental hazards? THere is one tiny vent on the ground with 1,000 meters of empty space around it that you got to avoid. At least fallout 4 had rooms filled with toxic waste.
If they want to fix this game they need to spend time overhauling each and every aspect then it has a chance.
Pandering to bad design only encourages bad design.
Look at outlaws it isn't a space combat game, in fact you spend more time on the ground in Outlaws then you do in space compared to starfield.
Yet Outlaws actually took the time to make space feel meaningful. Even though it is not a space combat game.
So you got 2 different design philosophies
1. If you are going to add it make it meaningful
2. Hey lets just add a bunch of stuff as fast as possible with little effort as possible.
X4 is a space game
Elite is a Space Game
Star Wars outlaws isn't a space game yet they did a great job designing space
Bethesda has no excuse.
Also will point out Bethesda originally planned on having the ability to leave the space ship while in space.
Those are all things that SF could have, or even should have, done better. But that doesn't mean it's wasn't an enjoyable game for me, there are things in every game I play that I wish were different. I could just as easily name a dozen things about Outlaws that could/should have been done better. I mean, that game is flawed, just as SF is. But it still works as a fun game, in spite of its failings.
I don't play the game you are talking about, it's not my sort of thing. If I want to fly a spaceship I will play Elite or X4 and a few other things. If I want to multiplayer it is Elite. If I want to explore planets it will probably be Elite or Starfield. The tone and design philosophy of a modern starwars game is not, from what I have seen, something that would appeal to me, the only reason I mention this is that we may have to agree to disagree on that one.
Bethesda games typically have a broader range of mechanics that are individually less developed than more specialised games in each respective area. It's by virtue of their design philosophy to create a "world you can live in" that they try to provide a large matrix of possibilities for player-driven gameplay and have it broadly work. For each game where you can say "Game Y does this better", you can say "the Bethesda RPG has these other features that game doesn't." This is also why mods and expansions have so much wiggle room to add value to a Bethesda game by focusing on one area and realising some of the potential - eg survival mechanics, outposts or stealth. They start out broad, not deep. Often with mechanics that are not even switched on/fully implemented.
For instance, since you pick out some space games, I'd love it if it had deeper building and logistics gameplay and EVA like X4 and fulsome joystick support with a gorgeous flight model, and reputation mechanics like Elite. On the other hand it has things those games lack (and in some cases the communities have asked for for years) like fully customisable ships, properly navigable ship interiors, atmospheric planet exploration, first person boarding and capture of ships, theft of ships: so, broad, not deep, and the mods and expansions change that over time. It's the same with TES and Fallout.
Although, again, not a space flight game or sim.
Then why not just watch a video and you will see.
To save you time start at 3:27 in the video.
It's much better than elite dangerous also because Elite suffers from almost the same problem of being empty and more importantly tries to be realistic so it doesn't add unique environments into space.
https://youtu.be/PrPgjTlWKVY?t=203
The words you are looking for is Quantity over Quality. "Broader range of Stuff"
No, they decided to be lazy let's be honest.
Look at Fallout 76 launch they literally released it with no NPC's intentionally thinking that the tapes were enough. They were so shocked and claimed they never saw this coming. They thought players would hang around and do all the NPC stuff so they could save time.
NPC's were never planned and only after backlash they were added.
They are trying to find the most minimal effort passing grade possible.
Just look at Starfield Survival system
1. It doesn't take into account location
2. All diseases you earn are RNG based, getting worse by RNG or better by RNG.
3. There is no "preventive" mechanics you could take to protect yourself.
4. There is no future predictive mechanics to know weather in advance
The weather could be "Toxic Rain" and you can literally be inside a building and still be affected by it.
The only thing the game considers not affected is if you go through an airlock.
Why? They based survival system on not immediate location but to look for airlock tag in zone area.
So stop pandering.
They need to roll up their sleeves and and start overhualing every mechanic one by one from the ground up and dedicating one patch to one mechanic.
Not a bad concept for console funzies, and no shade if you find it fun, why not... but for me, for a full modern game on the PC I would probably avoid that like the absolute plague. It looks substantially worse than the combat in NMS, never mind Starfield, neither of which even really bothers to do space combat.
Oh well, each to their own. It's a definite NO vote from me, though.
I notice you ignored the entire point of the video.
The space Environment being vastly better than Elite and Starfield
You also ignored the fact the turning angle is large unlike starfield where you turn on a dime. So when turning you can't just immediately track the enemy, chase is involved.
At least in Elite though it does have wide turning angles the bigger the ship.
Starfield doesn't even care, all ships treated exactly alike.
Or in summary.
Starfield took the easiest lowest effort possible route in every single mechanic possible and made the same mistake Saints Row did. It spent all it's money developing the character editor.
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one tbh. It's your jam, and that's cool, and I don't want to crap all over it, so I'm gonna leave it there.
That was Bethesda games ~20 years ago, but it no longer is. They've cut so much functionality out of prior games and blocked so much gameplay with essential NPCs/safe situations that their ability to expand a game's feature set on-the-fly is crippled to the point of almost non-existence.
The mile-wide puddles they've been making for the last ~13+ years don't need to be widened anymore, they need to be deeper.
P.S
In Space because there is no air resistance if a space ship has side thrusters it can move laterally without issue.
So yes that mechanic is accurate enough.
But Wait are you claiming starfield has accurate "physics" ?
Or anything remotely accurate?
The question was about gameplay where starfield is quite literally floating in the bottom of the barrel.
*Walks into Sand Storm*
*Walks into building*
*Still gets debuff from sand storm*
Me: What the heck is this low trash nonsense?
Fans: "Its super highly advanced physics modeled by TOP MiT Scientists! You won't understand!"
Trash needs to be called out, that's how it improves.
Or it just propogates more trash.
Bethesda needs to be willing to accept so many mechanics are trash and dedicate reworking it from the ground up, one mechanic at a time. Just like fallout 76.
1. Enemy Diversity ( Each faction is actually unique )
2. Crafting Components actually have meaningful useful purpose ( Consumable tools )
3. Valid Money Sink
4. Outpost overhaul so it actually serves a purpose
5. Planet Gen overhaul
6. Planet POI overhaul so there are mechanics in the building - Refinerys have leaks with dangerous gas you need to shutdown, Power Plants that may have reactor cores melting you need to find a way to cool off, lots of possibilities
7. Total and complete Space Overhaul
8. A total Redesign of Neon - so it is more like Jig Jig Street of Cyberpunk or Afterlife in Mass Effect. And less like a PBS kids show.
And space combat in Star Wars isn't exactly something to aspire to when one goes for realism. Though it is if one goes for unrealistic arcadey fun.
I said it looks substantially worse than space combat in Starfield and NMS, two games which basically don't bother to do space combat. I wouldn't want that kind of ...combat shoehorned into my space games after i bought them, and would be very strongly against it, to the extent I would rather have bad space combat like the two games mentioned, or even nothing. You consider it fun. It's acceptable to you. It is what it is.
I can understand some of the reasoning and I have played some other games in the past that had better dog fighting. But let's get real, there is no dog fighting in space. The flight controls are no where near realistic. Even if they did put realistic flight in SF no one would like it. There is no turning at orbital speeds. If your not in orbital speed you are falling toward the nearest planet.