• Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Imo the big problems with the game are because they outsourced so much of it.

    Although there were too many fetch quests (imo), generally the game I found to be quite engaging. Just, not very deep systems; load times going into even the smallest buildings meant it’s not even approaching open world; drab procedural planets and outposts in a sad attempt to bulk it up; horrid animations and NPC models that wouldn’t be out of place in a game 10 years ago. Not to mention the horrendous amount of bugs I experienced.

    This is why I can no longer allow myself to get excited for new games. I paid £7.99 for a month of PC gamepass to experience Starfield, if I paid full price I’d have been very unhappy. Now we pay to be bugtesters.

    • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      load times going into even the smallest buildings

      Oh my god, it’s such a little thing but the sheer inconsistency with what is and isn’t a loading door is absurd. New Atlantis, the first city in the game is awful with this. You have “the well” where everything is on the same map, no loading. Then you go to the commercial district and it’s a coin flip with little to no logic behind it.

      Add the heavy reliance on fast travel to get anywhere and it just falls flat on its face on the open world exploration feeling. Sad considering the plot and dialog make such a huge deal about exploration.

      • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah they really flopped with that aspect. I saw someone refer to it as ‘loading screen simulator’ and couldn’t disagree. I don’t understand how other devs can make things seamless, but Bethesda couldn’t manage it.

        • The Barto@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Other Devs try to use current gen engines, this is the same engine that Skyrim was on just with more shit added.

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

            You could argue the same for most games on most Engines. Half Life: Alyx is the same engine as half-life 2 with more shit added over the years (I think they’ve changed it with the upgrade to Source 2, but this really showed as all Valve games would run as hl2.exe, and source 2 is merely an evolution, not a rewrite).

            However Bethesda’s Creative Engine was already quite dated by the time Skyrim came out 12 years ago, and hasn’t received any meaningful improvements since. Honestly at this point it’s not a technical issue, any competent software team could have incrementally fixed and upgraded the engine over 12 years, no matter how buggy it was when Skyrim was released and how much spaghetti there was to clean up.
            Bethesda just doesn’t care that their game mechanics are stuck in 2009 and the management is probably too set in its ways to figure out another way to write quests or design level without loading screens, too comfortable with the ease of writing dialogue trees without mocap or even some basic “first year of film school” camera placement.

            Too bad for them Baldur’s Gate 3 showed the world that these things actually matter. I won’t hold my breath for TES VI, the technical gap on their engine is only growing and they still haven’t indicated even an acknowledgement of its flaws.