Sure Todd, lol

  • Otome-chan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    “1000+ planets are dull on purpose”

    No, they’re dull because no human team could make 1000 planets worth of interesting content in a single game development cycle.

        • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You know someone is gonna make a mod that generates random and unique bases from hab complex assets.

          And thats exactly why Bethesda doesnt put the effort in. cause they make the game, then the modders make it good for free… Or it used to be that, now they want to charge for mods and take a cut of the profits for shit they didnt make.

          • Otome-chan@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            At a scale of 1k planets you’re going to have to rely on reused assets and procedural generation. At which point people not into procedural generation say that it’s “repetitive”. Especially if you only gen once for everyone and not each run lol.

            AI generation of assets and code will theoretically eventually resolve this, but that’s quite a ways off. They’re not even usable for such with human assistance yet. And if you have ai generating the content, it’s not really a human team making that stuff lol.

    • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They could at least make the random PoI’s interesting if there was some…randomness to them.

      Like, I walk into a PoI, I already know where the chests are, the locked doors, are, where the stupid fucking corpse in the shower is, etc etc. cause I’ve ran through this PoI 20 times.

      I dont know why at least the locations of chests and locked doors cant be randomized. Make things at least marginally interesting, instead of cookie cuttered to extreme.

      • abraxas@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        While I agree, I’ve been saying that about NMS for years. Not that we want to be comparing Starfield to NMS, of course.

      • Otome-chan@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can, but randomizing chests+locked doors is kinda complicated, and the more “interesting” your generations the harder it is to code and the more dev time it takes. And for a AAA game release you can’t really do that.

        Key+Lock randomization is something that has been solved, and has been used most notably in procedurally generated zeldalikes. But that’s still niche indie territory, and not used for major game releases.

        • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hasn’t this game been in development for like 5 years? And they built it on an existing engine that they have tons of experience with. You could have said “they were limited on how much they could randomize POIs because of the old engine” and I would have believed you because that sounds way more plausible than “it’s hard to code, so AAA games can’t do it”. Like what?

          • Otome-chan@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The issue with procedural generation is the game has to be built for it from the ground up and in a modular way. AAAs try to make themselves appealing by using novel new high quality assets that aren’t modular.

            I haven’t played starfield so idk what they ended up doing, but from the sound of it they have pre-made assets/areas that they then place onto pre-generated worlds in a randomized way.

            To make one of these “areas” procedural in itself, they’d then have to code a whole system for that. With AAA/3D the hard part is making modular environments without it looking repetitive or ugly.

            My point isn’t so much that it can’t be done in a AAA game. But rather that it’s risky to do (not all players like it), and you have to structure your development around it. Lots can go wrong, there’s stuff you gotta sacrifice to make it work, etc.

            If starfield is on the old bethesda engine then that’s even more of a reason. You can’t just plug and play an entire procedural generation thing in there without some fairly large overhauls or just gluing on an unrelated system.

            In practice, bethesda probably took the lazy route: using their existing engine without major changes, then just making new assets for it, throwing stuff about a bit randomly, and calling it a day.

            That’s the thing about procedural generation is: it’s a lot of effort and sucks up a huge part of the game’s development and comes at some pretty strict costs (repetitive looking environments/gameplay, reduced novelty, larger programming dev time to make it work). It can be done, but for a cost-cutting AAA studio they’re not gonna bother.

            • XenoStare@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              They already have once though. Many of Morrowind’s dungeons were procedurally generated in development then edited a bit after, that was the same engine. Same with Daggerfall altho that was a diff engine.

              Very different game but Amnesia: the Bunker has plenty of procedural generation as well.

              It’s not at all impossible for one of the largest game development studios to have some procedurally generated, essentially dungeon content. Doing a bit more than the exact same place copied and pasted would be a huge undertaking yes, but if they wanted to they could have. There are plenty of 3D rogue-likes out now as well. Returnal is AAA and haa procedurally generated levels, far more complicated than neccesary for Bethesda to do in order to populate planets in their game about planet exploration.

              • Otome-chan@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I didn’t say it’s impossible. Just that it’s harder, takes deliberate effort, etc. For AAA games they don’t bother with that kind of thing because it’s larger expense and larger risk.

                • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Just to wheel things back onto the road.

                  I was never asking for fully procedurally generated dungeons.

                  I just said randomize chest locations and door locks. It cant be that hard for a company that has been using the same game engine for almost 22 years to implement a node system to roll a spawn chance for a chest, or a door to be locked or not (with a higher chance of node spawns behind locked doors).

                  Hell, they could have even gone the lazy way and just copy and pasted the PoI a few times and manually changed the cosmetics/appearances.

                  With space and prefab buildings, they have the ultimate excuse for why every dungeon is identical (at least until you get into the underground caves…), but not every one of them should have the same dead body inthe same location in the same shower, the same succulent on the same shelf. move the body to a different location! Have a chance for a cluster of books to spawn instead of the succulent! Its a prefabricated hab structure, but that doesnt mean they come with such strict instructions as “Only succulent A on this shelf”

        • Malta Soron@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Couldn’t they just have copied the locations a few times and changed up the doors and chests by hand? Seems like an easy fix.

          • Otome-chan@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            yes. I haven’t played the game so idk the details of what’s up. but at 1k+ planet-sized spaces it’s hard to have a team go over that by hand. Planets are large. But I have no doubt that bethesda team was probably super lazy as well.

  • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    109
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Most of the planets are dull on purpose because my graphics card catches fire if there’s too much excitement on screen. Thanks for looking out for me, Todd!

  • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    96
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ah yes “…Bethesda’s managing director, and Todd Howard, who is Todd Howard.”

    Thanks for clearing that up AI writer.

    Also how is it thrilling to “blast off” and “set foot on a new planet” when the game is more clicking through menus and fast traveling.

    In No man’s sky you actually land. In star field you fast travel.

    • Treczoks@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      In No Mans Sky, you’ve seen five planets, you’ve seen them all.

      • Beetschnapps@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not necessarily but yea it trades the bespoke environments for generated ones that aren’t so dissimilar.

        I think it makes for interesting comparison. Both space traveling games, one comprised of specially designed levels navigated by menus, the other less variety but you actually journey to them and given the sheer number you can actually discover and name a planet no one’s ever been to.

        Both valid but I think starfield shouldn’t advertise really advertise in exploration. Unlike NMS it’s far more narrative based.

        • Treczoks@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Both valid but I think starfield shouldn’t advertise really advertise in exploration. Unlike NMS it’s far more narrative based.

          Yep. There are three space games on the market that are not too far apart: NMS, Elite: Dangerous, and Starfield. They have similarities, they have differences, and they have different target audiences.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      RockPaperShotgun’s review is out now, and I could not agree more. The game is so meaningless.

      It’s crazy impressive. Especially on a technical level. But it feels like a tech demo more than a game almost. It’s still fun to idle time away in, but it’s not engaging. At all. It’s brain idle time. In a positive way, but also no more than that.

      • Erk@cdda.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        In this case I’d call that a positive statement. That’s what I was looking for when I decided to get the game… I’m not going to shell out my dimes to Bethesda hoping for disco elysium, I basically want something that makes demands of my brain just a little more than solitaire or minesweeper.

        I don’t really agree with it not being ‘engaging’ though, I guess depending on what you mean. I’m not staying up at night wondering what’s gonna happen next, but I’m staying up past my bedtime designing space ships and then running out of cash and going and doing a fun loot-and-shoot mission to get more money to build more space ships. That ain’t bad.

    • buddhabound@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I told my buddy the other day that it was Bethesda Menu Simulator 2023, and I wasn’t wrong. I was working on my outpost, so I’d place some stuff, go to star map, select the planet with the material, pick a landing spot, land, get up, mine ore for 5 minutes, fast travel to ship, repeat 2-3 more planets, choose the outpost, land, place some more stuff. Then repeat.

      • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You could skip fast traveling to your ship, or do any of the plethera of quests instead of what you’re doing

        • buddhabound@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Or, and I know this is a crazy idea, Bethesda could have made a game that has enough content to fill the space (pun intended) they created. Yes. I can run back to my ship through the mined out area I just cleared just to prove a point that the game is as flawless as you’d like to believe. Or, I can offer one fair critique of the game.

          I’m looking forward to what modders do with the canvas Bethesda has provided.

          • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nah I mean you can just fast travel off the planet without first having to fast travel back to your ship, a few less loading screens and menu interactions right there.

            • buddhabound@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Honestly, I didn’t even think to just go to another planet without stopping by my ship first. That’s somehow… worse? I thought it was super weird when I realized I could do it from the outpost without a ship nearby, but hadn’t thought to just fast travel everywhere all the time.

              • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Definitely saves some time and extra loading screens/menu navigation, sorry I wasn’t clear with what I meant initially.

      • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        i find it less headache to just sit in UC distrobution and fast forward 24 hours to keep reseting inventory to get all the mats I need to build, at least my starter shit.

  • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Exploring is supposed to be a reward in itself

    Oh yes, exploring 6 levels of nested menus is incredibly rewarding

  • Zacryon@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Disclaimer: My comment is a reaction to the stuff Todd and his minions said in the article, not necessarily about the game itself. I haven’t played Starfield yet. I just find the statements really weak and want to express why I see it that way.

    Yeaaahh that’s nice for maybe a couple of hours, but then it starts to get boring. That’s not how you keep players engaged, although there are of course those who don’t find that boring at all.

    We’re not astronauts, we’re not there. Astronauts had the thrill of the voyage through space, stepping on the moon and feeling with ones own body how it is to walk on the moon’s dust in low gravity. Also astronauts had and have a shitload of scientific equipment and experiments to carry out, i.e., a purpose beyond the mere jolly walking.

    If they were just there for walking and that for days, weeks, months, they would get bored pretty fast as well.

    Take a look at No Man’s Sky. Similar problem. The procedural generation algorithm made planets look familiar after you’ve seen a couple. There is nothing new. Exploration became unrewarded. But Hello Games has massively improved on that over the years and produced a game where you can sink dozens of hours without getting bored so easily.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I have played Starfield.

      The planets being mostly empty is fine. In fact, I think they’re too full if anything. You’re not meant to travel on the planet’s surface for long. You explore a bit if you think you want to build an outpost there, but otherwise you just move on. Most of the “content” is in pre-built areas. Enemy encounters almost always take place in hand crafted facilities, and usually it’ll be for some kind of quest so you land right near it.

      The outpost system is where the procedural planets come in. You need to explore some to find the right spot to build with the resources you want. The content there is the building, not the planet. The landscape will effect it some, but mostly it’s whatever you make of it.

      That said, the outpost system fucking sucks right now. You have to send resources between outposts with “links”, which take goods into a container and store them in linked containers. All solid goods go in one type, and the same for liquid, gas, and manufactured. I have all of my resources trickling into a main base, so I have all resources available there. This has caused my storage to back up and there’s no way to filter out items you don’t want. Then no resources can come in so you have to go to your storage and clear whatever is clogging it. There’s also no way to delete items as far as I’m aware, so you just dump the excess resources on the ground where they’ll remain forever. It’s really stupid. This is my storage solution for now.

      All the crates flow into the next one, so it’s functionally one massive storage container, but with 15 seperate inventories I have to go through to get anything out. There’s also no stairs object you can build, or anything like it, so I stacked cabinets into a sort of access staircase. It’s really bad, but it’s what works for now.

      Just a tip if you start playing and build a main base, build it on a low gravity planet so you don’t have as much of a problem if you stack stuff like this.

      • Quentinp@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Does it eventually give you a purpose or guide you to making an outpost, I haven’t felt much of a need yet.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s one part in the story that you need to build a thing in a shop or an outpost, but it doesn’t require you to really build an outpost. I did it so I can have any supplies for upgrading things without too much effort. I think that was a mistake, but now I’m too invested. Lol.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That reminds me of how annoyed I get with Satisfactory as well…

          As a Factorio player, this could all be handled so much better in both games, but Starfield is particularly bad. It’s like they never even tried building outposts before launch. So many basic functions are missing.

      • reverendsteveii@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I gotta be honest this looks like Minecraft construction but even in Minecraft there are ways to sort out and destroy unwanted items

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, and without any way to actually manage the resources. I want to like it, but I see so many issues that should be easy to solve that they just didn’t. Sure, it’ll be fixed with mods and maybe DLC, but that shouldn’t be required for basic UX.

          Another one of my big gripes with outposts is that there is no way to view your existing outposts. There’s not a list, and definitely no way to view what an outpost is producing. Hell, you can’t even view what an outpost is producing when you’re there. It’ll tell you the total quantity produced of everything combined, but not of what. It’s bad.

    • Chailles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      No Man’s Sky still has the same problem it began with, although the landscapes are vastly improved. It doesn’t matter what planet it is, there’s nothing to distinguish it from the last planet other than what species owns the system, the flavor of hazard present, and the overall color.

      No Man’s Sky honestly has not enough planets with just dead barren empty planets. At least in Starfield, there’s some magic in seeing actual fauna. You don’t get that feeling in No Man’s Sky because you’ve seen fauna and flora on the last 30 planets you’ve been to. You need those empty planets to make the planets with life actually feel special.

      • Zacryon@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No Man’s Sky still has the same problem it began with, although the landscapes are vastly improved. It doesn’t matter what planet it is, there’s nothing to distinguish it from the last planet other than what species owns the system, the flavor of hazard present, and the overall color.

        Regarding the variety and interesting features of the bare planets, I tend to agree. My point was rather that there is more to do now and the fun with - even familiar planets - lasts longer.

        No Man’s Sky honestly has not enough planets with just dead barren empty planets.

        This is not correct. The amount of more dead planets immensely depends on - spoiler alert -

        spoiler

        the galaxy you’re in. NMS has different galaxies with different distributions for lush or dead planets. This also has some effects on the difficulty.

          • Zacryon@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You don’t need to. There are different possibilities for switching galaxies. The simplest ones would be to use portals which is accessible very early in the game.

            • Chailles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay, but from my understanding, in order to change galaxies, I have to find a portal, figure however to use the portal, and then switch galaxies.

              For someone whose put in a few hours into the game multiple times as the game has been steadily updated, I didn’t know about portals or even that switching galaxies was even a thing. So telling me I’m incorrect because it’s NG+ COULD have fixed it for me is pretty disingenuous. How am I suppose to know that after going through 6 more galaxies that I can get what I wanted from the start?

              • Zacryon@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Okay, but from my understanding, in order to change galaxies, I have to find a portal, figure however to use the portal, and then switch galaxies.

                As soon as you can use the space anomaly (which happens very early) you already have a possibility. But apart from that, sure, it still takes a bit of effort and is not an option available when starting the game. The latter would be a nice idea though.

                I didn’t know about portals or even that switching galaxies was even a thing. […] How am I suppose to know that after going through 6 more galaxies that I can get what I wanted from the start?

                By using an internet search engine of your choice.

                https://nomanssky.fandom.com/wiki/Galaxy_Centre#Travelling_to_other_galaxies

                But I get what you mean as this is not clearly communicated right from the beginning in the game and something to be discovered. So your best chance to know this, besides doing the story missions, is to talk to other players or by curiously clicking on some suitable links in the NMS wiki.

    • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve played Starfield and it’s fantastic. There’s so much story. The world-bulding is different because there’s literally 1000+ worlds and they’re mostly uninhabited. I’m not sure what else you would expect. There are some huge, in-depth cities and some beautiful landscapes. But there’s also empty deserts and plains, just like we see everywhere in space.

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, the first thing I did when getting to the core was to generate an ancestral galaxy so that there would be more dead worlds. Didn’t like having every place overrun with life.

  • sylverstream@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I really don’t understand all the negative comments. It feels like a very fun game and I can’t wait to play it again.

    • TauriWarrior@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      If your enjoying it then don’t worry about the negative comments. Unlike some other space games you dont do much travel yourself, you fast travel everywhere which means seeing the same non-skippable cutscenes again and again, i fast travel to the system, then fast travel to the planet, then fast travel to the surface; then if i want to go elsewhere on the planet i have to fast travel back to orbit then back down to the planet. Its “fast travel:the video game” Given that similar games have managed to let you fly your ship from space down and around the planet for years now I dont why you cant in this, im constantly pulled out of playing for a loading screen

      • DangerDubhain@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not arguing with the crux of your argument here, but most fast traveling I’ve done is way more direct than that. New planet, sure there’s a few stages, but anywhere you’ve been before you can pretty much fast travel to directly from anywhere.

        • TauriWarrior@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          How often are you just hopping between places you’ve already been?

          As to the people saying you can fast travel back to cities, last time (which was about 5 mins ago) i went to go back to New Atlantis i had to faat travel to the system first before i could even select the city, but other times ive been able to directly select the landing spot and fast travel there from another system so I dunno.

          I just went and did stuff in Sol, i fast travelled to the system, fast travelled to the city, ran to the bar close to the landing pad, ran back to the ship, fast travelled to orbit, fast travelled to Venus, killed 3 ships, interacted with satellite, fast travelled to staryard, fought a decent amount of people which was good, fast travelled to Neptune, short fight, board, kill 3 or 4 peeps, fast travel to lodge. Then fast travel to mining planet system, fast travel to planet, talk, fast travel to different system, fast travel to planet run to ship, no bad guys just a quick convo, then fast travel back to ship, fast travel to orbit, and now fast travel to different planet.

          Also fuel auto refills after every jump just seems to mean more fast travelling if you need to go further

          If your enjoying it then im happy for you not trying to detract, just sharing my experience, i just wish they pushed what could be done more

          • 100@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think if there’s a patrol scanning your cargo you have to hit the system before landing, otherwise you’d fast travel your way past contraband scans. I’m having a lot of fun in the game, I agree there’s too much fast traveling though.

      • OrnluWolfjarl@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You can’t because the engine is bad, and they need a lot of loading screens to connect the small-sized playable areas. Other Bethesda titles pull the same trick, but you don’t realize it, because there’s no loading screen. Instead it’s doors that handle that (which is quick because rooms are small) and pre-loading of neighbouring grids when you are outdoors (which is why sometimes you’ll see creatures popping out of thin air, or walking out from behind walls/trees/rocks to hide the popping.

        Bethesda always advertises their “new engine”, but really it’s exactly the same engine they’ve been using since Morrowind, with minor logic improvements and updates to the graphical assets. It’s to the point where a lot of bugs have ancestry trees.

        • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Bethesda always advertises their “new engine”, but really it’s exactly the same engine they’ve been using since Morrowind, with minor logic improvements and updates to the graphical assets. It’s to the point where a lot of bugs have ancestry trees.

          Yep. Call it Gamebryo, Call it Creation Engine, Call it what the fuck ever.

          Its still NetImmerse.

          They can keep slapping fresh makeup on it, and keep wraping new ducttape around it when the old stuff wears out and fails, but it’ll always be the same engine, regardless of the name changes.

          They dont want to invest in making a whole new engine (which, given Bethesda, would be just as bad or worse than what they use now), and they don’t seem to want to license anyone elses engine. Which is weird, cause subsidiary studios don’t seem to have the same issue… Like, Ghostwire Tokyo is built on Unreal Engine 4.

              • Dreyns@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Oh yeah things were that simple, just change it ! Man who would have thought ! Hey we need your help on other issue what can we do about the economic crisis, world hunger or civils wars ?

      • Xiaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        taking the other side of the argument, planetary landings in E:D are just loading screens at 10x the length. Travelling to a planet at .3 C is neat the first time but then you look at trade routes as “how long do I sit paying attention in case of an interdiction?” StarCitizen falls into the same trap. QD is neat but then it takes you 5 minutes and a fuel stop to go from one side of a system to another. Its mundane trudging for reality rather than getting the boring monotony out of the way of the player.

        Just because the tech exists doesn’t mean it makes for compelling gameplay.

        • Obi@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I can agree with this but I do wish it involved fewer loading screens and clicking through each time. If you’re gonna skip the “realism” to make it more convenient then make it actually convenient.

          With that said despite that and the fact I’d love to fly the ship over the planets manually, I’m really liking it so far (2h in).

          • Erk@cdda.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah I can’t really disagree with people’s assessment of how much travel-by-loading-screen there can be, but like… while it’s there, I just mostly haven’t noticed it. Thirty hours in now and I find I’m mixing up fast travelling wide distances with “manually” travelling by launching into orbit and jumping place to place fairly regularly, I don’t think I’d even have thought to criticize it without coming here.

            I like how immersive travel can be in a game like NMS, but it’s not like it’s all that exciting or fun to pull into the atmosphere for the 500th time and maneuver to your landing pad, or spend longer than a loading screen amount of time to boost out of atmosphere to hit the jump button. We’re exchanging one form of slightly tedious load for a different one.

          • Xiaz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The best answer I have to minimizing the interaction is setting routes from your mission list. On PC this cuts down to L > click mission > R > hold X.

            It is still 4 discrete inputs, which sucks, but it is substantially better than navigating by the star map which is how my brain defaulted to fast travel for most of my first play through.

        • jsdz@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          There are all kinds of possibilities, and for one example of a video game system for travelling among the stars that gives you a sense of actually going somewhere without getting too dull I’d point to EVE. You can go anywhere, but there are distant and dangerous places that take actual effort to get to. It lets you get some kind of sense of the distances involved. Having made that comparison it’s hard to avoid noticing that the space combat (even against NPCs) and ship outfitting are quite good too compared to how it looks in Starfield. Planetary interaction was pretty tedious when I played it, but EVE is mostly really good at the space stuff.

          Another example would be good old Star Control II, another of my favourite space games. Another one that managed to make space feel big. You had to carefully manage fuel and resources, and if you wanted to go all the way across the map you’d have a long and interesting journey during which many things would happen. Combat and navigation were primitive compared to what people expect today, but still it made it feel like you were exploring a vast space, not just a big catalogue of planets.

          As for Starfield, I don’t know whether it does that or not since I haven’t played it yet; I’d sort of like to find out before I spend $ on it.

          • Xiaz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            you cant really compare gate-to-gate traversal to the other primary space games though. unless you are in a capital ship, generally you have a warp around 3-5 so even Niarja (minus dock workers) only takes a few seconds to cross. If we just focus on hub routes, I don’t recall the exact number, but Amarr to Jita/Dodi is between 25-60 jumps depending on your risk tolerance. That is 25 discrete load screens, with a Leopard and no 0 tick gate camps thats still around 10-20 minutes of just loading. EVE is an exceptionally bad example to pull and why I excluded it.

            If you want something like Star Control then running the bubble in E:D is your best option, just never install a fuel scoop.

            • jsdz@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              What I want is just something where travel takes enough time and effort that interesting problems can arise during the course of it that aren’t just generic random encounters. Something where different parts of space have local character, something like geography rather than a flat isotropic void where distance is meaningless. In each case the technology used for moving about is entirely fictional, so I don’t see a reason not to make it interesting. I was just pointing out examples of that being done, not advocating for either of them being the one true way to do it.

              • Xiaz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                transit in EVE isn’t really anything to write home about though. Target, align, warp, jump, target, align, warp, jump.

                Gate camps are player based RNG with a difficulty slider. Do you take the shorter run thru Niarja or do you add an extra 30 jumps for relative safety barring CODE affiliates.

                if what you want is a completely bespoke experience where a system has only explicit experiences then you immediately lose out on the design intent behind Starfield and the storyline within is immediately hollowed out and meaningless.

                besides, its a video game. everything is a generic random encounter rolled on a table hidden from the player. if you want a better experience, Starfinder is there.

                • jsdz@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I used to make a living hauling valuable stuff from the outer edge of low-sec in to Jita and such places. Sure it got to be pretty much routine after a while. Well, most of the time. But then it’s always possible in that game to go off and do something else instead. The experience of exploring it all for the first time though, having not yet gathered the knowledge and resources to do it in anything like safety or comfort, was fantastic. If you could just teleport instantly from one place to anywhere without significant cost it wouldn’t even be a game. I’m not saying that the mechanics of transportation should dominate every game like they do EVE, but having at least some of that sort of thing seems like a good idea in a game that’s supposed to be about exploring a space of any kind. I disable fast travel in Skyrim too. It makes things too quick and convenient.

    • thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      For me, the criticism is more directed toward the PR and hype. There’s still lots to like about the game, it’s just frustrating how they spin it.

      I’m glad you’re enjoying it!

    • Afrazzle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think people had their expectations too high. People are expecting it to be as good as skyrim was for 2011 but in 2023, but I went in expecting it to be as good as (vanilla) skyrim is now and so far that’s what I feel like I got.

      • sylverstream@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I had no expectations and I like it. I always get disappointed when I have high expectations.

        Tbh I’m mainly disappointed in the graphics of the surroundings.

  • Blue and Orange@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    I really like the game so far but it really needs some kind of vehicle for travelling around planets. Like the exocraft from No Man’s Sky.

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can’t even traverse the whole thing, right? Don’t you hit a barrier and are forced to backtrack and take off/land somewhere else?

    • NuanceDemon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Game engine limitations, apparently. Say a thread on exactly this earlier today.

      Agree it is much poorer for lacking them. It’s immersion breaking being in the far future, zipping around on an interstellar craft, yet being forced to explore slowly on foot. I really can’t even use the ship? Cmon.

  • Yepthatsme@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have no clue what people are talking about? I have beaten it twice and surveyed an entire solar system and there was plenty. You can fly around to any point in most planets and moons and have stuff generate at each landing, within hiking distance.

    I feel like the game is so big and good, the haters are just hating and being stupidly immature about it.

    • vitriolix@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think here we are reacting to the colossally dumb reasoning in the quote from the article. Astronauts had a few things to be excited about that gamers… won’t

    • CraigeryTheKid@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Beaten it twice? like the main story? Honestly I forgot Skyrim had a story too. I always wandered for so long I forgot what I was doing.

    • Kilamaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ng+2 ? Any more change at +2 over +1, apart from the item & ship? Does the suit even improve ? And the ship ?A good mantis still is better I found

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everything in the game is “within hiking distance” because that’s how the game generates planets. You don’t just “land on a planet”. You go through several hidden loading screens and arrive in a 1km x 1km square of planet.

      • cyanarchy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Your ship is kinda like a player home you bring around with you. Having one that uniquely suits your needs and preferences is cool, and also I want a damn weapon workbench.

          • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is it? I find it pretty fun, sure games like everspace did it better, but that is literally a space dogfighting game lol.

            NMS space combat is noticably worse in comparison, and some of the upgrade paths and the ability to adjust your reactor usage (very reminiscent of FTL) make it interesting enough for me.

    • Erk@cdda.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The ship builder is just tons of fun. I wish the controls were a little bit more obvious but once you get the hang of it, I think it’s my favourite in genre. I love building something neat and then going to check out the interior walkthrough, particularly. I think I need a save where I just cheat in millions of credits so i can experiment for a while

    • stevedidWHAT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Who needs logic and rhetoric when you have 💰

      Lord knows there’s enough content creators now to self sustain shit games and businesses for all of time regardless of what genpop is interested in

  • banana_meccanica@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    They thought they had a brilliant idea, but it’s not. It’s a classic. The space is beautiful, of course, but it’s the interactions that make a game unique. No interaction, no party.

  • Quentinp@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve been enjoying Starfield - but the empty planets suck, especially without vehicles. The scanning thing is boring and dumb, worse than trying to get 100% on a NMS world. It’s a shame that fast travel disconnects you from the space feel of the game, but it makes the rest of the game playable. I like the game overall, but they have definitely dropped the ball on space travel. In theory it’d be cool to come across different “dungeons” etc, as in Skyrim when wandering around, but doesn’t happen in Starfield because you’re generally not going to happen upon them. It’s not interesting to drop down to random planets.

    • jcit878@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have MSFS2020 and enjoy completing long haul flights. literally a whole workday spent where I see nothing but cockpit controls and the sky through the window, with no interaction needed due to autopilot. then I bring her in to land 10 hours later.

      and that’s fun.

      fun is what you make it man

      • Koffiato@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Very different games and very different expectations of effort spent. I’ve space trucked a lot in Elite, spending hours going back and fort. But it was never dull, more of a relaxing experience.

        That comment stems from games failure to live up to its promises.

        This game was marketed as an explorers game with 1000 planets to see, for example.

        None of those planets have even the half of the content Skyrim/Fallout has. None of those planets are barren as Elite’s planets, either. You can’t traverse them more than 30 minutes, so it doesn’t even scratch NMS itch. People that liked the exploration of any of those four games would dislike this games exploration very much.

        The person above was probably expecting a more lively game, like any other Bethesda game and got whatever this is instead. It’s completely justified to be disappointed.