Shartfield: Episode IV - A New Cope

[The Mad Titan]

Don’t make this a BG/starfield thing. BG3 blows anything in its class out of the water, especially Diablo. Nothing about it feels dated, it’s leaps and bounds ahead. It didn’t have competitors copping please, before release, for nothing.

I also got love for starfield and feel it was scored too low, and unfairly in some cases. As with most Bethesda games, mods will help it a lot, especially a year for now. It is what it is. Bethesda should definitely perfect their formula with their next flagship release.

I'm not, it's confusing when I see responses like this though.

BG3 isn't something new or fresh. Infact it embraces the very thing you knocking starfield for. The combat and the freedom of how you build your character is stripped back from other games before it (D2)


And to get it out the way, Diablo and BG3 aren't even the same genre nor or they really similar, it's really no reason to compare the two. I bring that up because the game that BG3 is similar to as of recent is Divinity 2.

Starfield is basically all of the best of Bethesda plus new mechanics and features without the dozen and dozen of bugs.

As of now almost every mechanic that Bethesda uses is improved upon.

The main reason I brought up BG3 is to show the hypocrisy, because it's as old school as you can get, tride and true DnD, the graphics aren't mind blowing and the game is known for having a terribly buggy act 3.


And those same people that love it are hating and nitpicking starfield having not even played it for any amount of time.

 

[Loose]

Don’t make this a BG/starfield thing. BG3 blows anything in its class out of the water, especially Diablo. Nothing about it feels dated, it’s leaps and bounds ahead. It didn’t have competitors copping please, before release, for nothing.

I also got love for starfield and feel it was scored too low, and unfairly in some cases. As with most Bethesda games, mods will help it a lot, especially a year for now. It is what it is. Bethesda should definitely perfect their formula with their next flagship release.

I've played both they aren't even comparable games, outside of them being "role playing games" no clue why they're being compared in the first place. Bg3 is more comparable with something like pillars but at a more AAA scale. I guess this is console war shyt cause these games shouldn't even be discussed in the same sentence. Ones a open world action rpg, the other is a dungeons and dragon table top strategic rpg. BG3 does a lot of things great, but it's not playee controlled combat focused game. Not even the same usee contract aspect. It'll be like comparing elden ring to bg3, stupid comparison

 

[Artificial Intelligence]

 

[BBG]

So for the brehs playing it, do you feel like this shyt couldn't be 60fps? My only issue in this whole debacle is like damn if you took all these concessions the least you could do is optimize the shyt to run at 60 frames I don't understand what's so demanding about a buffet of fast travel menus that won't let this game run smooth 60 fps on "the most powerful console"

 

[987654321]

I've played both they aren't even comparable games, outside of them being "role playing games" no clue why they're being compared in the first place. Bg3 is more comparable with something like pillars but at a more AAA scale. I guess this is console war shyt cause these games shouldn't even be discussed in the same sentence. Ones a open world action rpg, the other is a dungeons and dragon table top strategic rpg. BG3 does a lot of things great, but it's not playee controlled combat focused game. Not even the same usee contract aspect. It'll be like comparing elden ring to bg3, stupid comparison

I totally agree. Starfield will stand on its own merits and be successful in its own way.

 

[ItWasWritten]

So for the brehs playing it, do you feel like this shyt couldn't be 60fps? My only issue in this whole debacle is like damn if you took all these concessions the least you could do is optimize the shyt to run at 60 frames I don't understand what's so demanding about a buffet of fast travel menus that won't let this game run smooth 60 fps on "the most powerful console"

We covered that already Mr BBG

Post in thread 'Starfield: Episode IV - A New Cope'
https://www.thecoli.com/threads/starfield-episode-iv-a-new-cope.993438/post-50344524

The Series S is to blame

 

[987654321]

I'm not, it's confusing when I see responses like this though.

BG3 isn't something new or fresh. Infact it embraces the very thing you knocking starfield for. The combat and the freedom of how you build your character is stripped back from other games before it (D2)


And to get it out the way, Diablo and BG3 aren't even the same genre nor or they really similar, it's really no reason to compare the two. I bring that up because the game that BG3 is similar to as of recent is Divinity 2.

Starfield is basically all of the best of Bethesda plus new mechanics and features without the dozen and dozen of bugs.

As of now almost every mechanic that Bethesda uses is improved upon.

The main reason I brought up BG3 is to show the hypocrisy, because it's as old school as you can get, tride and true DnD, the graphics aren't mind blowing and the game is known for having a terribly buggy act 3.


And those same people that love it are hating and nitpicking starfield having not even played it for any amount of time.

There’s nothing confusing about this, you’re just not reading comments; maybe it’s due to the fog of console war III.

I’ve never knocked starfield, I’ve supported it from the beginning. I know it’s not perfect but it’s perfect for me.

You had no reason to even mention Bg3 unless it was to make a passive slight and comparison. It’s not getting much hate because it refined existing elements to perfects, added new ones, and took steps to brings its whole genre into the future. Diablo is very much included in that.

Starfield is out, you don’t even have a reason to defend it. It’s standing up all on its own, and will be an experience that’s going to be remembered fondly in the long term.

 

[hex]

But they didn’t make any of those claims.

They even said LOTS of area on the planets would be fairly baren.

Todd Howard Says Only 10% of Starfield Planets Have Life on Them - IGN

Bethesda's Todd Howard has revealed that only 10% of Starfield's 1,000 planets will have life on them.

www.ign.com

This is just people making up shyt to pretend to be “disappointed”



He literally detailed exactly how the game works.

I never said he did, and what i said wasn't about "Starfield" specifically.

Dude I quoted said regardless of what a dev says, you should have realistic expectations. I'm saying if a dev says wild shyt, like there's 5,000 fully rendered planets....I don't care how difficult that would be to do, I'm gonna expect it.

Fred.

 

[hex]

I'm not, it's confusing when I see responses like this though.

BG3 isn't something new or fresh. Infact it embraces the very thing you knocking starfield for. The combat and the freedom of how you build your character is stripped back from other games before it (D2)

This is kind of disingenuous as Larian's previous games were their own creations and "BG3" is licensed from "Dungeons & Dragons".

It's not stripped back, they have to make a game within that world and rule set.

Fred.

 

[BBG]

We covered that already Mr BBG

Post in thread 'Starfield: Episode IV - A New Cope'
https://www.thecoli.com/threads/starfield-episode-iv-a-new-cope.993438/post-50344524

The Series S is to blame

My bad, I was too busy playing videogames to keep up with the chatty patty assembly in this thread.



But that's fukkin crazy and I'm still pretty confident this will be my last Microsoft console. Literally finna start a separate savings account to throw change in so that by the time next gen comes I'll have like 4 racks to just instantly turn into a PC God and eat like never before

 

[BBG]

I never said he did, and what i said wasn't about "Starfield" specifically.

Dude I quoted said regardless of what a dev says, you should have realistic expectations. I'm saying if a dev says wild shyt, like there's 5,000 fully rendered planets....I don't care how difficult that would be to do, I'm gonna expect it.

Fred.

That's not what I said at all fakkit (that was excessive my bad )don't twist my words to strengthen your shytty argument

 

[High quality poster]

Was hoping this would be all time classic game, something to make Sony step it up even more but I guess not. No wonder these nikkas raised the prices, they saw that this is literally the biggest game for Xbox this generation and it’s trash.

 

[daze23]

I never said he did, and what i said wasn't about "Starfield" specifically.

Dude I quoted said regardless of what a dev says, you should have realistic expectations. I'm saying if a dev says wild shyt, like there's 5,000 fully rendered planets....I don't care how difficult that would be to do, I'm gonna expect it.

Fred.

a fool and his money are soon parted

 

[Outlaw]

Was hoping this would be all time classic game, something to make Sony step it up even more but I guess not. No wonder these nikkas raised the prices, they saw that this is literally the biggest game for Xbox this generation and it’s trash.

Have you even played the game yet?

Let nerds with pointless agendas make you miss out on an all time classic game brehs

 

[Loose]

So for the brehs playing it, do you feel like this shyt couldn't be 60fps? My only issue in this whole debacle is like damn if you took all these concessions the least you could do is optimize the shyt to run at 60 frames I don't understand what's so demanding about a buffet of fast travel menus that won't let this game run smooth 60 fps on "the most powerful console"

No. It's a cpu bound game. You'd need a top of the line cpu to run this at 60. Most games are gpu intensive, they probably can do a uncapped framerate mode, but the way creation engine tracks everything in this world its next to impossible for 60fps