The Outer Worlds VS Starfield VS No Man's Sky

[D.A.R.K.]

I have a huge question for those who know and/or played those 3 games:
Which one do you prefer? If YOU would recommend me one, which one and why?

It seems all of them are basically the same game from different companies. The same style of gameplay, the same style of lore, basically a copy of each other with their respective unique aspect that make them their original IP. From the point of view of someone who didn't play any of those games, but saw some videos, I really don't know which one is the one I want. I live in Brazil, I'm not rich, and I can't get all 3 unless they start to do a -90% discount, but I can get one... Price is important, and this means Starfield is already losing in this personal race for me. In the same way, content is important, I don't want to do the main storyline and be done with the game.
Just for comparison:
No Man's Sky = R$ 162,00 (constantly going -50%)
The Outer Worlds = 159,90 (top discount -70%)
Starfield = R$ 299,00 (didn't even release yet)

No Man's Sky: To me, is a 3D copy of Starbound that started ♥♥♥♥♥♥ and then developers made a great job fixing it. No Man's Sky is the one who consolidate this type of game (not a new genre, not an original idea) but it's the one who brought this type of "infinite space" game style to the world.

The Outer Worlds: In my point of view, is like a Fallout game (Fallout 3, New Vegas, or Fallout 4) on space, it looks like, it seems more focused on lore and talking to NPCs to do quests, those type of thing, more than No Man's Sky. It seems you can't mine everything like in No Man's Sky neither, isn't like a sandbox.

Starfield: Well... The game has even been released yet, I saw almost no videos about it, just a guy showing where to sell contraband items and a gameplay of a mission of a guy killing some dudes that came out of a ship, I assume it's one of the initial missions, like tutorial and stuff... This one looks like is more about the main story than exploring and doing your thing, it feels like, once you beat the main story, there's nothing more to do.

So... Here's the question again:
Which one do you prefer? If YOU would recommend me one, which one and why?

[AC Denton]

The Outer Worlds.

Ironically, Starfield feels more like The Outer Worlds than a typical BGS game. But Starfield is missing a lot. The use of procedural generation makes exploration really meh. It's a huge disappointment. EDIT: I do love Starfield though, it's just missing a lot. There's a lot to criticise.

The reason I recommend The Outer Worlds is that while it is a smaller experience, that allows it to be more handcrafted and refined. The Outer Worlds is a solid experience from start to finish that isn't filler or overstaying it's welcome.

[squished]

No man's sky doesn't seem much like Starfield to me. NMS is much more procedural, and much less fast-travel. Edit: and Starfield has a LOT more dialog.

[Sol4rSky]

Starfield is trash, Literally, the space is just a box , sometimes with some content lying around, otherwise it's just filler. Anywhere you go you literally "Fast traveL". You go to space, then you can't just fly to a planet, you gotta open the map and "fast travel" land. Whole thing looks awful, boring and needs a beefy PC FOR NOTHING. You'll probably spend more time in the menu clicking "stars" and fast travelling than actually flying "in space" in that game and on the landing areas which only got a small range with stuff the rest is empty wasteland.

Outer Worlds is actually nicely crafted unlike that game that just bases itself on Todd and hype.

I can recommend you either No Man's Sky or Outter. No Man's sky keeps getting massive updates and a lot of stuff to do. At least both No Man's and outter don't look like diarheea and run good.

[TheOrangeBox]

Originally posted by AC Denton:

Ironically, Starfield feels more like The Outer Worlds than a typical BGS game. But Starfield is missing a lot. The use of procedural generation makes exploration really meh. It's a huge disappointment. EDIT: I do love Starfield though, it's just missing a lot. There's a lot to criticise.

. . . . Starfield, a space game that doesn't know how to be a space game.

[D.A.R.K.]

Originally posted by TheOrangeBox:

Originally posted by AC Denton:

Ironically, Starfield feels more like The Outer Worlds than a typical BGS game. But Starfield is missing a lot. The use of procedural generation makes exploration really meh. It's a huge disappointment. EDIT: I do love Starfield though, it's just missing a lot. There's a lot to criticise.

. . . . Starfield, a space game that doesn't know how to be a space game.

When you go to a planet, the only thing you can do is walking simulator between cave to another, or city to another, the planet is just a huge open hub area with nothing to do but walking around. So... Isn't even a planet game.

[NUTTER]

Originally posted by D.A.R.K.:

I have a huge question for those who know and/or played those 3 games:
Which one do you prefer? If YOU would recommend me one, which one and why?

It seems all of them are basically the same game from different companies. The same style of gameplay, the same style of lore, basically a copy of each other with their respective unique aspect that make them their original IP. From the point of view of someone who didn't play any of those games, but saw some videos, I really don't know which one is the one I want. I live in Brazil, I'm not rich, and I can't get all 3 unless they start to do a -90% discount, but I can get one... Price is important, and this means Starfield is already losing in this personal race for me. In the same way, content is important, I don't want to do the main storyline and be done with the game.
Just for comparison:
No Man's Sky = R$ 162,00 (constantly going -50%)
The Outer Worlds = 159,90 (top discount -70%)
Starfield = R$ 299,00 (didn't even release yet)

No Man's Sky: To me, is a 3D copy of Starbound that started ♥♥♥♥♥♥ and then developers made a great job fixing it. No Man's Sky is the one who consolidate this type of game (not a new genre, not an original idea) but it's the one who brought this type of "infinite space" game style to the world.

The Outer Worlds: In my point of view, is like a Fallout game (Fallout 3, New Vegas, or Fallout 4) on space, it looks like, it seems more focused on lore and talking to NPCs to do quests, those type of thing, more than No Man's Sky. It seems you can't mine everything like in No Man's Sky neither, isn't like a sandbox.

Starfield: Well... The game has even been released yet, I saw almost no videos about it, just a guy showing where to sell contraband items and a gameplay of a mission of a guy killing some dudes that came out of a ship, I assume it's one of the initial missions, like tutorial and stuff... This one looks like is more about the main story than exploring and doing your thing, it feels like, once you beat the main story, there's nothing more to do.

So... Here's the question again:
Which one do you prefer? If YOU would recommend me one, which one and why?

I'm almost 40 hours in and that couldn't be further from the truth. I've done 4 of the main quests and the others so far have been the piracy quest line missions and I'm loving it. There are a ton of side quests I've picked up and just had to leave for later. The outer worlds for as much fun as it is its very very short. Took me 12 hours to finish. Hardly comparable to the scale of fallout and starfield.

[NUTTER]

Originally posted by D.A.R.K.:

I have a huge question for those who know and/or played those 3 games:
Which one do you prefer? If YOU would recommend me one, which one and why?

It seems all of them are basically the same game from different companies. The same style of gameplay, the same style of lore, basically a copy of each other with their respective unique aspect that make them their original IP. From the point of view of someone who didn't play any of those games, but saw some videos, I really don't know which one is the one I want. I live in Brazil, I'm not rich, and I can't get all 3 unless they start to do a -90% discount, but I can get one... Price is important, and this means Starfield is already losing in this personal race for me. In the same way, content is important, I don't want to do the main storyline and be done with the game.
Just for comparison:
No Man's Sky = R$ 162,00 (constantly going -50%)
The Outer Worlds = 159,90 (top discount -70%)
Starfield = R$ 299,00 (didn't even release yet)

No Man's Sky: To me, is a 3D copy of Starbound that started ♥♥♥♥♥♥ and then developers made a great job fixing it. No Man's Sky is the one who consolidate this type of game (not a new genre, not an original idea) but it's the one who brought this type of "infinite space" game style to the world.

The Outer Worlds: In my point of view, is like a Fallout game (Fallout 3, New Vegas, or Fallout 4) on space, it looks like, it seems more focused on lore and talking to NPCs to do quests, those type of thing, more than No Man's Sky. It seems you can't mine everything like in No Man's Sky neither, isn't like a sandbox.

Starfield: Well... The game has even been released yet, I saw almost no videos about it, just a guy showing where to sell contraband items and a gameplay of a mission of a guy killing some dudes that came out of a ship, I assume it's one of the initial missions, like tutorial and stuff... This one looks like is more about the main story than exploring and doing your thing, it feels like, once you beat the main story, there's nothing more to do.

So... Here's the question again:
Which one do you prefer? If YOU would recommend me one, which one and why?

It would be starfield for role playing imo, there are a huge amount of stories and lore etc the world is huge. NMS has a story but none of it is voiced. All of the missions are very simplistic but i think its an amazing space sim/survival crafting game. I have a ton of hours on nms on the xbox and pc combined. I'd say buy starfield cheaper on cd keys and get nms on there too nms will cost next to nothing as its been on sale a ton. Why not enjoy both games for what they are. There are things in one game you can't do in the other and vise versa.

[gedasr]

Starfield = The Outer Worlds + No Man's Sky.

[The Shadow of Death]

Originally posted by gedasr:

Starfield = The Outer Worlds + No Man's Sky.

The way I see it, yes, but it's better and worse in certain ways. Like, you lose the seamless travel that No Man's Sky has, as well as less sheer size, but the areas with structures have a lot more detail to them generally. Some would argue that Outer World's is a better overall FPS-RPG. Starfield has has its own Bethesda spice to it. The world is more interactive than Outer Worlds, but less than No Man's Sky (which allowed you to destroy much of the terrain, as opposed to only specific ore deposits).

[Narsan]

The choice of game depends on your preferences. The Outer Worlds, Starfield, and No Man's Sky each offer a unique gaming experience. If you're interested in a space simulation, No Man's Sky is your best bet. On the other hand, if you're seeking a narrative-rich adventure, The Outer Worlds is the way to go. Starfield falls somewhere in between, combining elements of both genres. However, when it comes to space simulation, No Man's Sky excels, while The Outer Worlds shines as an RPG. Ultimately, consider either No Man's Sky or The Outer Worlds based on your gaming preferences. If you're eyeing Starfield, it might be wise to wait a couple of years until they release all the DLC and offer discounts.

[Galvador]

No Man's Sky and Outer Worlds are very different games. Sci-fi games yes, however NMS is more of a minecraft in space with massive emphasis on exploring procedurally generated planets, while Outer Worlds is a sci-fi RPG that has emphasis on narrative. Both are great games, so just make a choice based off of what you like.

[Flybye]

I was considering buying Starfield. After this thread, I think I won’t. I loved the Outer Worlds, but I don’t love it enough to turn it into something like NMS. It’s size is manageable and little waiting required.

[👁]

Star Citizen is much better then Starfield, well that just my opinion. But i never play Outer Worlds so i cannot compare it but i play other Space game so i can compare that.
For No Man Sky, is nothing to compare because the gameplay is completely different one is sandboxes and one is RPG.
For Star Citizen, it have it element of the game BUT different playstyles one is Hardcore Spacegame like Escape from Tarkov and one is RPG

[Rodrigo]

OW is woke, overpriced and unbalanced.

Starfield is woke and overpriced

NMS not woke, priced right, unbalanced

Pick your poison

[D.A.R.K.]

Originally posted by Rodrigo:

OW is woke, overpriced and unbalanced.

Starfield is woke and overpriced

NMS not woke, priced right, unbalanced

Pick your poison

I'm not from the US, I'm from Brazil, we don't give a ♥♥♥♥ about woke ♥♥♥♥ or any other socials BS, we just want to play good games, we don't have a small mind to allow a single word is enough to ruin the experience for us.

I already saw more than 400h of game play of Starfield, the game is crap =)
I rather go The Other Words for lore and NPC interactions, or No Man's Sky for exploration and crafting.