Starfield Review
xander.ai
Starfield Review
1–10 of 14 posts
Re: Starfield Review
#2Its a great game. Iam at like 40 hours and just started my second playthrough (part of the game design and its not 100% the same as the first one - an interesting solution if you ask me.
Difficulty feels sometimes a bit off (I play on hard) and menus are a bit quirky. Iam not the greatest fallout fan after fallout 2 but starfield bound me to my PC for 3 days and it was a pleasant expierience. I have still at least a few hours to explore.
Re: Starfield Review
#3I also didn't built an outpost, no reason too. The gfx are rather good except the faces. Such high detail on clothes then the face look rather low quality.
No ground vehicles is also kinda annoying.
The quest markers are all the same color, current quest should be a different color.
If you keep the same companion, they become your lover. No real story there.
Fast travel is rather nice, but it doesnt always work when questing on planet.
Ship building should include room layouts.
Bugs, so many bugs.
Re: Starfield Review
#4I also didn't built an outpost, no reason too. The gfx are rather good except the faces. Such high detail on clothes then the face look rather low quality. No ground vehicles is also kinda annoying. The quest markers are all the same color, current quest should be a different color. If you keep the same companion, they become your lover. No real story there. Fast travel is rather nice, but it doesnt always work when…
>The gfx are rather good except the faces
Mind elaborating? The graphics are sub-par for a 2023 game, if I had to rate them they're ~2017 AAA levels.
The textures are garbage, the lighting is garbage (no raytracing in 2023?!), the faces are garbage^2, the particle effects are sub-par and full of obvious billboards, and the foliage looks like something from a mobile game.
Re: Starfield Review
#5I also didn't built an outpost, no reason too. The gfx are rather good except the faces. Such high detail on clothes then the face look rather low quality. No ground vehicles is also kinda annoying. The quest markers are all the same color, current quest should be a different color. If you keep the same companion, they become your lover. No real story there. Fast travel is rather nice, but it doesnt always work when…
Whenever I read about the experience of playing one of these giant proc-gen RPGs, I can only harken back to HGttG:
“So the hours are pretty good then?' he resumed. The Vogon stared down at him as sluggish thoughts moiled around in the murky depths. Yeah,' he said, 'but now you come to mention it, most of the actual minutes are pretty lousy.”
Re: Starfield Review
#6I also didn't built an outpost, no reason too. The gfx are rather good except the faces. Such high detail on clothes then the face look rather low quality. No ground vehicles is also kinda annoying. The quest markers are all the same color, current quest should be a different color. If you keep the same companion, they become your lover. No real story there. Fast travel is rather nice, but it doesnt always work when…
>The gfx are rather good except the faces Mind elaborating? The graphics are sub-par for a 2023 game, if I had to rate them they're ~2017 AAA levels. The textures are garbage, the lighting is garbage (no raytracing in 2023?!), the faces are garbage^2, the particle effects are sub-par and full of obvious billboards, and the foliage looks like something from a mobile game.
> The graphics are sub-par for a 2023 game, if I had to rate them they're ~2017 AAA levels.
I honestly don't think I could tell the difference between 2023 AAA and 2017 AAA — though granted I'm not as much of a gamer as I used to be. But still, are 2017 AAA levels really "garbage"?
Re: Starfield Review
#7The "Sci-Fi Past" section is especially worth a read, as it goes beyond starfield. This is something we see a LOT in scifi these days - portrayals of a future that's more Jetsons-y than it is an accurate portrayal of a real future. The call out on robotic voices to denote AI is something that is indeed already solved... so why is the future taking a step back?
Would love to see more Sci-Fi not be lazy with this and try and create what the future will be, rather than fall back on what the future used to be.
Re: Starfield Review
#8The "Sci-Fi Past" section is especially worth a read, as it goes beyond starfield. This is something we see a LOT in scifi these days - portrayals of a future that's more Jetsons-y than it is an accurate portrayal of a real future. The call out on robotic voices to denote AI is something that is indeed already solved... so why is the future taking a step back? Would love to see more Sci-Fi not be lazy with this and t…
Perhaps it's a step back because game development started 10 years ago (I have no idea when they started)? They probably start with the story, so if it revolves around dumb robots...
Re: Starfield Review
#9The game feels like it should have been released a year or two after Skyrim (2011):
- Graphic look to be the same quality of the upscaled ones they released for Skyrim
- Quests are pretty much the same but now instead of exploring a world going between places you just fast travel everywhere
- Dialog in emotional scenes falls into an uncanny valley with how bad faces look or just dead eyes all over
Honestly I don't think I'm going to end up playing more then 10 hours at this rate there is a ton to-do but nothing feels worth doing.
Re: Starfield Review
#10The "Sci-Fi Past" section is especially worth a read, as it goes beyond starfield. This is something we see a LOT in scifi these days - portrayals of a future that's more Jetsons-y than it is an accurate portrayal of a real future. The call out on robotic voices to denote AI is something that is indeed already solved... so why is the future taking a step back? Would love to see more Sci-Fi not be lazy with this and t…
Nobody believes in a future anymore. Modern scifi is actually nostalgia content about the past when we did believe in a future. Hence Jetsons-type stuff.