Starfield will undoubtedly enjoy the same level of popularity and success as Skyrim, if not moreso.

I doubt it, the game is much more Fallout 4 than Skyrim, and I don't just mean that because of the laser pew pew. I just finished the Crimson Fleet questline (which was purportedly one of the best the game has to offer) and it was... fine. I also finally dabbled in the ship construction having for the longest time used an Eclipse Bayonet that I boarded & stole (seems like it was one of the best A-Class ships the game has to offer because I could never upgrade it) but the lack of meaningful things to actually do in the ship (why is there so little space combat?) kind of moots the point of having such a modular ship system.

I also started developing mining outposts with the intention of funneling things back to a home base and holy hell is the outpost system terrible, mostly because of how AWFUL the cargo link system is and how headache-inducing it is trying to store the billions of kilos of resources the game is constantly throwing at you (and yet I somehow am always short on the ones I actually need).

I am also constantly short of skill points (I am lvl 32 at the moment) and have managed to steamroll all the combat encounters on Hard without dropping any points in weapons skills and using only weapons I have found (I put all my skill points into planetary and ship skills because, unlike the rest of combat, ship combat is often brutal with groups of enemies melting your shield in seconds).

Anyways long story short I avoided any and all hype over Starfield due to Bethesda continuing to spiral Fallout into mediocrity. The end result is that I started playing Starfield with zero expectations. After a good chunk of hours with it I can say pretty reasonably the game is very "fine." It absolutely 100% does not have the inviolable magic that Skyrim (or Elder Scrolls in general) has. If anything it makes me worry for Elder Scrolls 6.

I had been super pumped/hyped about Starfield from the moment it was announced and it only grew with every morsel dropped from Bethesda.

The funny thing is, it lived up to what I expected it to be which was Skyrim in space...and that was fine with me. I loved Skyrim, warts and all, because it was a fun game on its own and the modding scene was, and is, unbelievably rich and vibrant. Starfield will be no different. Despite one poster's unhinged tempest in a teacup statements, Starfield will undoubtedly enjoy the same level of popularity and success as Skyrim, if not moreso.

Are there things I would have liked to have seen in Starfield that aren't there? Sure, but "liked to have seen" isn't "expected to be there" since I set my expectations based upon what Bethesda themselves showed and not what other third parties inferred, implied, or insinuated on their own.

ldonyo wrote on Sep 9, 2023, 12:33:
What a facts-optional, mindless, rambling word salad this piece is!

Are you saying AI could have done a better job?

What a facts-optional, mindless, rambling word salad this piece is!

VaranDragon wrote on Sep 9, 2023, 05:34:

noman wrote on Sep 8, 2023, 23:50:
This article itself has the same problem it's pointing out. It never once mentioned what type of game Starfield is and the fact that it generally got extremely positive reviews with some outliers, or the fact that it's the most successful Bethesda launch ever. Instead, it's taking the internet arm-chair experts and detractors' voice, making it into the overall market's reaction to the game and then trying to explain it, when there is no mystery around such things. Games get bashed all the time and especially when they are trying a few different and new things, angering the 'why is the game same' and 'why is the game not more different' crowd equally.

Or maybe, just maybe the game isn't all that it was hyped up to be?

Question should be, "who hyped it?". This isn't a case of Peter Molyneux, or Hello Games with No Man's Sky (at launch). It's the fucking rapid gaming community (gaming sites, youtubers, fans etc).

When has a game ever been all it was hyped up to be? If you ignore the hype and just play the game and judge it for what it is it just seems easier to me.

noman wrote on Sep 8, 2023, 23:50:
This article itself has the same problem it's pointing out. It never once mentioned what type of game Starfield is and the fact that it generally got extremely positive reviews with some outliers, or the fact that it's the most successful Bethesda launch ever. Instead, it's taking the internet arm-chair experts and detractors' voice, making it into the overall market's reaction to the game and then trying to explain it, when there is no mystery around such things. Games get bashed all the time and especially when they are trying a few different and new things, angering the 'why is the game same' and 'why is the game not more different' crowd equally.

Or maybe, just maybe the game isn't all that it was hyped up to be?

Prez wrote on Sep 8, 2023, 21:11:
Maybe just a tad melodramatic? Console wars and impossible-to-please fans aren't new.

The worst fucking thing about the Gaming market is websites (gaming/news/etc) and players who fucking salivate and raise their expectations of games to be the next coming of Jesus Christ, and when they aren't 1000% of what THEY expected, they get their panties in a bunch.

Like many game companies, Beth just released info and the internet dug into it and came up with their own assumptions.

I tend to think that a lot of this hatred is the result of mass effect three. I hated the ending just as much as anyone else, but holy hell, time to let that shit go.

noman wrote on Sep 8, 2023, 23:50:
This article itself has the same problem it's pointing out. It never once mentioned what type of game Starfield is and the fact that it generally got extremely positive reviews with some outliers, or the fact that it's the most successful Bethesda launch ever. Instead, it's taking the internet arm-chair experts and detractors' voice, making it into the overall market's reaction to the game and then trying to explain it, when there is no mystery around such things. Games get bashed all the time and especially when they are trying a few different and new things, angering the 'why is the game same' and 'why is the game not more different' crowd equally.

Not the case with BG3.

This article itself has the same problem it's pointing out. It never once mentioned what type of game Starfield is and the fact that it generally got extremely positive reviews with some outliers, or the fact that it's the most successful Bethesda launch ever. Instead, it's taking the internet arm-chair experts and detractors' voice, making it into the overall market's reaction to the game and then trying to explain it, when there is no mystery around such things. Games get bashed all the time and especially when they are trying a few different and new things, angering the 'why is the game same' and 'why is the game not more different' crowd equally.

Maybe just a tad melodramatic? Console wars and impossible-to-please fans aren't new.