4 ms·
It's not, though. I don't think Starfield is bad -- it's well-produced and rich with many widely beloved game elements from earlier Bethesda project -- but it f
by swatcoder 3y ago
It's not, though. I don't think Starfield is bad -- it's well-produced and rich with many widely beloved game elements from earlier Bethesda project -- but it focused on the ElderScrolls/Fallout bits that I didn't care so much about and pushed aside the parts that absorbed me into those games.
Specifically, the other franchises let you literally just wander around through a hand-crafted world stumbling into who knows what. There are very few games that can deliver that because the hand-crafted thing is sooo labor intensive and expensive.
But Starfield failed to deliver on that. There are countless quests and destinations and rich dialog trees, but if I just push forward on my control stick, I will immediately leave "hand-crafted" behind in favor of "procedurally generated" and then I will hit a wall in at most 30-40 minutes. That's so tremendously different than what I was able to do in the other games that I just didn't have a reason to play anymore.
Bethesda wasn't obliged to deliver on the bits I personally loved about the other games, but I (and some others) were legitimately bummed when they didn't.