I'm glad they're getting performance in order... but the game play itself still needs a lot of work and fleshing out.
Creation is kit is the only solution sadly, modders are just unofficial Bethesda employees right?
Fuck that.
I just finished a 430 hour run in this game. It's not the masterpiece we were all hoping for, but it's not the failure I keep reading about, either. It's fine. Some folks just seem to enjoy being salty.
I'm done for now, but I'll be back after the CK and DLC drop. I had fun.
Same. I’m the dude who made the No More Will to Play post. There are certainly problems, weak points and straight up bad designs, but you and I wouldn’t have hundreds of hours played if it weren’t at least a little good.
I'll be honest - I feel however a game is, you will find someone who is happy to play it for literally hundreds of hours. I'm happy you enjoyed it (as I'm sure at least a few others did), but honestly think that on average people haven't. I may well be wrong! I'm mostly basing this off the reactions my friend groups have had to it, after a few weeks.
And based on my friend groups' reactions, I see the exact opposite. Frustrated with bugs and saying we'll just wait for patches from time to time, but the next day we're back into it and posting screenshots at each other and having fun
My little discord group did the same, but we all collectively admitted we were just finishing the game out of spite, and all the screenshots were of stupid shit and bugs.
and as soon as we beat it, everyone uninstalled it and its not been mentioned or played since.
Yeah.
You will find people that absolutely adore playing the most awful games imaginable.
That doesnt make the game good.
That just means that individual has weird tastes, and more power to them for enjoying it.
“The game we should have had at launch”
It’s just DLSS and quest and bug fixes.
Whoever wrote that shit should be ashamed of themselves.
I am 100% convinced that all the news articles being about DLSS missing is controversial, or means the games incomplete, or whatever, are funded by nvidia.
Cause the level of ridiculousness I've seen cause the game didnt support DLSS is absolutely insane. Like, proper mental.
You don't see this kinda shit when a game doesnt have FSR.
Especially when Starfield is being made by what is now a Xbox studio, so they would make sure the game would work on XBox... Which is graphically driven by AMD hardware..that supports FSR and not DLSS. So its not some big ridiculous conspiracy theory that DLSS wasnt in the initial plan.
Hell yeah! I’m guessing that by the “game we should have had”. They mean that I finally get a companion that doesn’t cry like a 3 year old with a skinned knee every time I kill someone. No?
Oh, ummmmmm, then I’m guessing they meant that choices actually have consequences and you can’t join more than one faction at a time. No?
Shit, third times the charm right? Then I’m going to guess I can finally complete the heart of mars mission. No?
Damn it!!!!!
The game we should have had at launch?
Sorry, but improving the performance of an ancient engine that shouldn't have been used for the last decade is not what I call "the game we should have" when there's so much more about the game that sucks other than the performance.
It's like Bethesda laser focused on us bitching about the bugs for 20 years, finally tried to iron them out, but then forgot to make the game world alive so it would be less buggy.
The engine is about 12 years old, and the engine it's based on is about the same age as Unreal Engine, which the current version of is generally considered a powerful and capable modern engine. That complaint is tired and nonsensical with even the slightest bit of critical thinking.
The engine is 26 years old.
It started its life as NetImmerse, and then got upgraded into Gamebryo, and then got Upgraded into TotallyNotGambryo™ (aka creation).
Here, a visual representation of Creation.
It's based on Gamebryo. It was substantially rebuilt.
Its lineage is 26 years old.
So is Unreal Engine.
Age isn't the issue.
Its so substantially rebuilt that it still has the same bugs and quirks as decades ago.
You cant say the same about Unreal.
Okay, but saying, in effect, that it's bad because it's old is ridiculous and inaccurate
Except its not.
because it is bad. and it is old. and it being old, is bad.
Its old, and bad, because it is still functionally the same fucking thing it was decades ago, the only real difference is they've stuck higher end graphics on it with ducktape and bubblegum.
its not a 1977 TransAm. Being old doesnt make it good. Being old doesnt make it performant. Being old doesnt make it stable. Its a piece of software. Being old means its got decades of cobbled together mess and baggage and unsolvable inefficiency that relies on nothing but brute force via powerful hardware to make it look good. Which is why it it runs like shit and still looks worse than a AAA title from a decade ago.
Creation sucked then and it sucks now.
Unreal is a different story, it was good then and it's good now.
This complaint is valid as every single Bethesda launch in the last 20 years has had the same fucking bugs in it because of the same fucking engine.
@canis_majoris @laurelraven I'm not sure that is really true. For one thing, I haven't been killed by clutter in Starfield. I definitely remember multiple deaths by clutter in Skyrim (physics silliness). I also haven't used fast travel and zoned in somewhere up in the sky (although that would be much less lethal in Starfield).
I may just be lucky, however. I haven't encountered most of the Starfield bugs I have seen complaints about.
A lot of them got ironed out because MS made them delay the launch by an entire year, and then put ALL of Xbox's QA onto the project. After 76, it was the least they could do.
I didn't notice a big improvement on my AMD GPU, seems to be largely targeted at Nvidia cards which makes sense since they were struggling so much.
Welcome to the Starfield community on Lemmy.zip!
Helpful links:
Spoiler policy:
[Spoilers] to your title if there will be untagged spoilers in the post.Post & comment spoiler syntax:
<spoiler here>