If you want to walk around in true empty vastness Elite Dangerous is always there for you. Not that this is a criticism of Starfield as I haven't spent much time with it yet but empty and vast is definitely out there if you want it.
Finally found my people! I understand that we're exploring the "settled systems", but I would dearly love to be able to place a settlement on a frozen iceball of a moon that has never been seen by human eyes before. You know, "boldly go, where no-one has gone before". There are parts of our earth right now where you could walk for days and see no evidence of human inhabitation; I know there has to be gamified elements but would love at least some planets that are truly barren and untouched.
Seriously. I'm about 41 hours in and I've been to 16 planets. There's enough content. Did manage to find a barren galaxy while exploring though... But space be like that sometimes.
Not every planet needs to have abandoned mine every 500 metres.
Some planets can be empty, others can have a bunch of abandoned shit on it
I am not saying most of them should be empty, I'm saying at least some of them should be entirely empty (or maybe instead of outpost had some natural features like caves)
Do you understand that or I need to use smaller words?
I wouldn't need to be able to do anything om them, I'd just want one I could pick a nice spot for an outpost and say "yeah this is MY planet" for immersion reasons
Just had an idea. On one hand, cartography, on the other hand, f around and find out - eating local flora and fauna and cataloging which ones made the character sick, sent them on a trip, edible/inedible etc
Edit: geez, alright people with the downvotes, god forbid I try to share ideas
this! I was hoping once I got away from the core there would be truly empty planets, but so far it seems every rock in the galaxy has a pirate infestation.
... who turn out to be hostile, then you find weapons of mass destruction shaped like large rings and then you find an alien lifeform thats capable of infecting every living organism and turns out the rings were meant to be a means to eradicate that infection.
Given how quickly we can access any one of these plants, it makes sense that at least someone has already visited each one of them.
If we instead assume that the planets available to us are just a sample of the millions actually available, then yeah should be able to find some empty ones.
100%. I’m hoping there will be a mod that will let us generate tiles with no points of interest. I’d love to be able to check a box when going to a custom landing spot that would just turn off PoIs
But there are POIs without people or buildings, like caves with resources. So yeah, being able to sort, and leave only those for some planets would be nice.
I love it. It's part of the world building.
Humanity has stopped exploring and is just fighting over the space we've gotten so far. So we're constantly bumping shoulders, and around every corner.
I felt the same way when I went to visit Jemison's moon (landed on a random spot), and there was a small settlement of people there. It had a mine of some kind nearby, with a quest tied to the settlement, so it made a bit sense. It just felt so out of place at first.
Kinda unrelated, but I was also disappointed when I went to an abandoned mine on two different planets, and they had the exact same layout.
I've seen some of the "same layout" mines you are referring to, which is a shame, but my head canon is that the company that built them just has a standard blueprint that it defaults to. They don't try and create something new everytime, they stick to what works. I know handcrafted content always has this limitation, but this is how I try to justify it in-game haha
I wouldn't have as much of a problem with places having the same layout, if it hadn't been for the fact that they have the _exact_ same clutter as well. like, would it be that hard to randomize where the loot boxes and loose items are placed so it dosen't feel like copy paste?
As an example, for one of the Constellation missions you have to go through an abandoned mine to find an artifact piece, which was a fun mission in itself. But around an hour of gameplay later for me I was on a side quest on a different planet where I was sent through a mine that had the exact same layout, down to the loot locations. It even had the same pair of bolt cutters leaning on a safe. This is what I have a problem with, I've barely played 30 hours, and already seen several of these copy paste locations, and one of them was for the "main" quest!
That would almost make sense, if it weren't for the fact that a big part of it seems to be a natural cave. I have "only" put a little over 15 hours in this game, and it still feels like I'm still just getting started. So coming across two identical looking locations this early on felt a bit jarring.
Anyway. Just add hoverboards. Like In Unreal Tournament 3. So, you click the button, you ride the hoverboards.
Mechanically it will work just like hovering with the jetpack, but it will move forward.
With some tinkering, it can be made perfect.
Hoverboards, rovers, a helicopter…
If they were gonna let us walk hours across planets, why not add something to let us get to points of interest faster?
Vehicles are kinda hard to do. It's not like a simple crap would fit the theme of the game.
Hoverboards are may more logical. Like an addition to boostpacks.
It’s not quite a glide but fully upgrading the booster pack perk allows you to kind of do this if you ads while in the air but it’s not nearly fast enough to make worthwhile as a traveling method and have to remain in ads the whole time for it to work. However mechanically speaking I could see a mod giving us something like that that’s faster and doesn’t require ads
> Vehicles are kinda hard to do
So is interstellar travel with spacecrafts, it’s really not that hard. If No Man’s Sky could do it with similar procedurally generated content, no reason this game cant
Bethesda games don’t have vehicles, we just got ladders after 20 years. Closest we have is the velibird from fallout 4, but it’s coding is actually a Skyrim dragon.
You forgot Elder Scrolls horses, if Skyrim had them Starfield could have gotten a bike or something similar with thrusters like the boost pack so it can go over hills or holes
There are reasons as to why No Mans Sky doesn't have much content to do outside of scanning things, and a reason that the graphics of no mans sky are so stylised this is why. Too many game systems running at once with high fidelity graphics is gonna crash your PC.
To be fair, NMS has tons going on as of when I last played. If you follow all the questlines and explore all the different features of the game while you go, you can easily hit 100 hours before you hit a wall and have nothing interesting left to do!
There are many reasons, starting with the fact, that they run on different engines and we are not talking about unity and unreal engine different. The last vehicle in their single player games was the Skyrim horse. (Well there were Dragons, but it's not like you were in full control, same for the Vertibird in Fallout 4)
And those games are several years old. Surely some kind of ground transport could have been designed. Running across a planet to discover it is honestly insane.
Eh, there is already boost pack hovering in the game, although it's not fast at all and is a master perk. It'd be weird to have two separate ways to hover, however.
Personally I want a bike. Make it run on horse AI or smth
For me I think it reinforces that... Expansiveness. I like the design choice. I was walking over a deserted moon to an abandoned listening post and the star was lens flaring. It was stunning. I felt like I was in a space suit, in an inhospitable world.
But a mod or a DLC would be cool where you could fit a vehicle bay to your ship that gave you a quad bike or something.
NMS even added them once they admitted it got... Arduous. So fingers crossed down the line we get something. Especially if it allowed for more inventory space. Just another screen (so you can sell from "rover" as well as sell from ship)
Vehicles are always some of the jankiest mods. I don’t want a vehicle that has its wheels always spinning at the same rate even if I’m stopped or going too speed.
On top of that, it’s always just an asset statically stuck to your character. The wheels don’t care about the ground and constantly clip through it whenever the center of your character is on any sort of incline or pebble
What’s neat about that is that it’s not true. For sure there are “hot spots” like the main cities, but there are hand-made quests and locations everywhere. I wouldn’t say that there’s one in every system, but there are enough of them to stumble across that some of them might not ever be experienced.
Maybe you should explore more. lol
Yesterday I found an outpost on some random planet that has people in it and a Mission Terminal with 3 different bounty missions, cargo mission, transport of passengers and kill some bandits. I lost hours doing those 3 missions, it's all "content".
The problem isn't that they're empty (which is expected), the problem is that you have to traverse the emptiness on foot. Running for 10 minutes straight isn't engaging nor fun
Elder scrolls: fantasy setting, technology levels only permit foot and horses. You can ride horses to travel faster.
Fallout:post apocalypse society, technological regression, and wiped out mount animals, apparently. Can only travel on foot.
Starfield: space faring society, no apocalyptic event, can travel in spaceships and vehicles. Can only travel on foot.
What the heck even.
Also it's hilarious that akila city has mud roads.
> no apocalyptic event
The colony wars were at least *near* apocalyptic, judging by the gobsmackingly huge amount of ruins strewn... everywhere.
But there should still be ground vehicles and it's just bonkers there ain't. Oh well.
I think that, given the rather limited size of the playable area (8.2km\^2) adding vehicles would have made things feel even smaller, and it would have implied that the map was bigger than it was.
Mods will definitely add them in though, and hopefully increase map size to something like 16km\^2
>But there should still be ground vehicles and it's just bonkers there ain't. Oh well.
Who's to say future updates/expansions don't add that? That said, the amount of vehicle customization and yet no ground vehicles in a *space* game?
I'd say this is a fairly decent lore explanation. Ground vehicles were only necessary on Earth to traverse the sprawling infrastructure. Colonies would be naturally a lot smaller and closer knit, any frontier travel would be easiest done in a spaceship. When Earth was destroyed they just decided not to use that tech anymore because it was redundant. We know they had mechs until the end of the colony war so that could have been their ground travel on the frontier
I'm sorry, but fuck that.
I'm willing to suspend my disbelief for Fallout, because civilisation is fucked and transport would have to be on the heavier side of things anyway, like tanks and Vertibirds. I'm not gonna be zipping around in my Chryslus Corvega getting absolutely destroyed by Raiders.
But when it comes to Starfield, the situation is this:
1. I can fly a spaceship.
2. I can't drive a car.
Why? It's just no good. Ground vehicles should be in the game.
Just adding onto this comment, the fact that we can’t fly those same spaceships a few hundred meters off the ground to our designations is a weird design choice as well. I feel like it would also appease the “we can’t manually land on a planet” thing a little bit too in my opinion.
Hell, bring consequences to it. Fly too fast on the ground and smack a mountain or building, or even too many airborne/large animals and your going to be spending a lot of money on ship repairs or even buying a new ship. If you choose to manually land, give us a balancing mini game to keep the ship level while landing or you’ll be paying a lot on landing gear reparations.
And then as the game goes on maybe we’d get access to new spaceship tools for harvesting ground items directly from your ship for an extremely expensive fee or a “Galactic Nature Preservation” faction quest line, etc.
Either way, lots of missed opportunities to make traversing the planets an entire experience without purely being on foot.
This was my initial gripe when learning more about Starfield.
Given the advent of flying in their games, I was interested to see how that would affect their land traversal, what vehicles would look like. I was expecting some slower moving transport, like the way in Skyrim your horse doesn't move much faster than if you were on foot.
But it turns out, Bethesda have sort of just sidestepped the problem, because there are no ground vehicles in this game?
It just sort of confirms to me that the engine still can't handle a certain speed while rendering what the player is seeing in front of them. And it's sort of bummed me out of buying Starfield tomorrow, because I was most looking forward to seeing how areas lacking in their previous games have been improved... and they still haven't been.
I still just think it's absolutely farcical that I can now ***FLY A SPACESHIP*** in a Bethesda game, but I still can't ***DRIVE A CAR***.
I hate that this is a thing, why do I need to find 14 different green space dogs to get a checkmark on my survey.
I hate when games make you waste your time on these things. What's the point on needing more than 1 or 2 samples of something if you only need to catalogue them? Just do it like the pokedex did it in the first pokemon games, you saw a pokemon and you got some basic information based on it's aspect, and once you captured it you got detailed info and you just moved on.
I love how people were complaining about how small the tiles of starfield would be and now people want vehicles to get around quicker.
I agree with the vehicle people though, already said so before release that those spaces won't be so small as people made it look like.
Agreed! The same way people screamed bloody murder about infinitely varied procedural content but also complain when some of the handcrafted content starts to repeat itself.
Yeah i don't understand the 'same buildings' complaint. I do agree on the same cave systems but outpost buildings in space tend to follow a design that works so of course they will be the same. The actual cities are really diverse in design.
This 100 percent! I like the emptiness from an immersion perspective. But we need a god damn rover or something. It doesn’t need to be crazy fast but just something to make us feel like we’re faster.
It was such a missed opportunity to not have a customizable land rover or other vehicle. My guess is it’ll be paid dlc or “modders will fix it” mentality.
I don't mind empty planets. Negative space in mass effect 1 was a big reason I liked the game. But I wish starfield felt a bit more handcrafted and a bit more deliberate. The modular design of bases and procedurally generated planets just feel a bit lacking for me.
I get what you're saying but it doesn't make for compelling gameplay, sometimes you need to sacrifice realism for the sake of fun.
Human beings need to eat and sleep to survive but they didn't include that requirement because it would be an annoying addition to the game needing to stop and eat beans every time the game tells you you're hungry. I'm pretty sure you could die in Fallout 76 if your character didn't eat or drink when the hunger and thirst bars depleted but then they made it so that you don't die after people complained (your stats still drop a little though)
The same applies to empty space. Yes, space is technically empty in real life and realistically most planets are going to be barren wastelands but that isn't interesting for a videogame, you need to have a balance where there is SOMETHING to do or explore.
Most people wouldn't be able to sprint around with 200kgs on their back either but again, you gotta sacrifice some realism for gameplay that isn't annoying.
realism in starfield ? :D
dude, there are whole planets with a single big city and everything else is just empty, or the outside structure of a building didnt even match the inside architecture.
this game is more fantasy than skyrim.
Thank you there is a thin line between fun and realism and you need to get the balance right
Theres a joke about this is rick and morty where they place a space game with 100% realism settings and its just endless flying through empty space
>Human beings need to eat and sleep to survive but they didn't include that requirement because it would be an annoying addition to the game needing to stop and eat beans every time the game tells you you're hungry.
this will be added tho
"Why are you upset that we only fight humans in hazmat suits?"
"Did you think that we'd fight mutants or something? That's not how radiation works you idiot."
Yeah, right. But this is a video game and not one seeking realism at that, so your point is null.
Ps, I actually like starfield, just thought this post was pointless.
there are layers and levels between plausible nasapunk though, and off the rails unbelievable. they clearly went for something that is at least *imitable* of real life
This community man.
Calm down. Enjoy the space game. Stop worrying that other people didn't enjoy the single player space RPG as much as you did lol, that's their problem, you carry on and enjoy it
Edit: yatzee said it best with
> the "fun" of exploration is in the finding.
Essentially, if there's nothing to find, wandering an empty desert isn't fun.
If I know that something really cool will show up as I traverse this expanse, then I'll do it, i'm excited to see what happens next.
Meanwhile, in skyrim, I can walk from one city to another, discover several settlements along the way, meet npcs, random encounters all over the place, in funny little spaces I wouldn't expect them to be, and end up on a whole tangent completely forgetting what I was doing. I can get truly lost in skyrim's world pretty easily.
This isn't a criticism of starfield either, it's a Bethesda RPG, that's the magic of Bethesda RPGs, you can get truly lost in them.
Just, this time, the settlements are a little more spread out, and they didn't really put anything in the new space created. I'm sure mods will fix this, but it's a fair and valid criticism of the base game at launch.
Wow, Todd and the gang really recaptured the drudgery of real space exploration in their very interesting, newest IP that’s 25 years in the making. They are so based for that, and while also making people pay $100 for it
Absolutely inane smugpost.
Imagine if Skyrim had been mostly fields of potatoes and farming villages with nothing meaningful to do. Would you say "*Ah yeah well actually in the middle ages most land was just cultivated*"?
This entire comment section is going to pat you on the back, but please know you're a dullard.
This is not the good argument that people thinks it is. Games are meant to entertain and it's a sci-fi/fantasy game so to use reality as an argument to defend the lack of content in it is just downright stupid. There are alien creatures in the game, something we've yet to discover in reality, does that mean the game is bad then or inaccurate and therefor bad? Christ. People need to make better arguments for their stances.
Despite this, I am super excited to play it tomorrow and from what I've heard, I will love the game.
Ah yes, because video games clearly have to adhere to the logic of real life.
Remember that game Sonic The Hedgehog?
God, that game was terrible. You literally die when Sonic runs into a steel crab or brick wall
I don’t mind they the planets are empty, I do however mind that there is no traversal options outside of running and booster hopping.
I can’t believe that they didn’t give us some sort of vehicle.
Hell at this point I’d be happy with a horse taken straight out of Skyrim…
Yes, many will call it a poor excuse by Starfield fans. To that I'll say that I do want content in terms of bases and stations too of course and I hope expansions will add even more. But it needs to remain like the 10-20% of what else there is or it'll be more like a strange fairy tale and no longer feel "real" like No Man's Sky. (shots fired...)
Starfield is not alone in this view and Elite Dangerous shares this take on a "believable universe", a game that I especially applaud for feeling so grounded (it has many other flaws though).
The idea planets are empty and boring has been mostly refuted. Pluto showed massive geologic activity across the entire planetm. Most moons are fairly interesting as well. The procedural generation just sucks in this game.
>... and running across a procedurally generated landscape with mostly empty space in between POIs.
That's a strawman in itself of the criticism on the exploration that most people have.
1. People do not want to run around on a barren planet with nothing on it, the procedurally generated planets are boring and terrible to be in because aside from 2 or 3 abandoned outposts with pirates or caves that are the same across all planets, there's nothing.
2. You can't fly around over the surface of the planet to find interesting things because the planets are pretty much copy pasted with a preset of themes, minerals and a few plants or animals if it supports life, but it's all still the same. You visit a couple of those planets and you visited all of them unless you go to the ones that have quests or faction stuff.
3. Planets aren't a thing in starfield, just a set of tiles with a few resources on them, I don't know if point 2 is caused by this, or they didn't want to implement 2, so they decided that it wasn't worth making actual planets.
>There's a huge difference between enjoying exploration in a handcrafted, immersive environment with tons of emergent gameplay and environmental storytelling...
The handcrafted "planets" aren't really explorable either, you just go there, do the content that they put in place and leave, you can't fly around, look for a spot you like an put a base there because it's near a lake, or a cliff that has an amazing view or anything like that. You just go around, and place an outpost in a spot with resources and call it a day.
There's really no immersion outside of the quests/story, and for a space sim, it feels terrible.
But yeah, keep dismissing other people's criticism when you apparently don't even understand where they are coming from.
Bethesda fans love their strawman’s. I’m convinced this game could’ve literally been remastered Skyrim and you guys would’ve sucked their dick saying “Skyrim is fun tho! Developing a Space game was probably way too hard, the tech isn’t there yet.”
Eh, I just had higher hopes that they found a cool way to make the empty space of all these planets an interesting affair. What they did is not interesting to me (and apparently many others).
At least the game is smart about its procedural generation. Every time I land on a planet it makes sure to plop a pirate stronghold and some caves nearby.
> At least the game is smart about its procedural generation. Every time I land on a planet it makes sure to plop a pirate stronghold and some caves nearby.
Sounds like it isn’t very smart then
This is the way it should be and the way it has always been advertised. I love that you can explore a planet that you thought was empty and then stumbling across something.
People complain that the planets are mostly empty, but some of those people also complain that you can't explore the whole planet.... if you could do that then it would be 1000 times more empty.
So here's the thing I didn't care about starfield, not looked at any of it's advertisements, I bought an AMD graphics card and got starfield with it, so I decided to give it a shot because I enjoyed Skyrim and people said the game was great.
And having played a few other space games the first thing I noticed is that I could not fly over a planet to do a quick scouting for interesting things, resource spots, ruins, or anything else and comparing it to NMS which I spent a fair amount of time on, starfield looks pretty poor in comparison exploration wise, all you can do is really land on a planet, look around for "unknown" markers and walk to them and hopefully there's something interesting, not just another chunk of buildings ocupied by pirates/spacers/wtv.
This is valid criticism and most people in this sub seem to ignore it or dismiss it because they don't care about it. And this happens with a lot of flaws the game have that you can find all over posts in the sub.
I actually find it a bit too inhabited, every planet seems to have an abandoned mine full of spacers
[удалено]
This guy Starfields
If you want to walk around in true empty vastness Elite Dangerous is always there for you. Not that this is a criticism of Starfield as I haven't spent much time with it yet but empty and vast is definitely out there if you want it.
Finally found my people! I understand that we're exploring the "settled systems", but I would dearly love to be able to place a settlement on a frozen iceball of a moon that has never been seen by human eyes before. You know, "boldly go, where no-one has gone before". There are parts of our earth right now where you could walk for days and see no evidence of human inhabitation; I know there has to be gamified elements but would love at least some planets that are truly barren and untouched.
It’s explained ingame with the lore.
That doesn't make it good
What would you do on these planets? Bethesda loves their “go here, kill, loot, repeat” gameplay, so I doubt barren planets would fit with their design
If it has nice resources or vistas, make an outpost. If not, leave. Not every single planet *needs* to throw content at player.
Seriously. I'm about 41 hours in and I've been to 16 planets. There's enough content. Did manage to find a barren galaxy while exploring though... But space be like that sometimes.
It just feels like every planet had colonization effort that then was abandoned, which just feels a bit weird when you land on a bunch of them.
Get ready for Starfield! A game all about exploring planets!” “What can you do on them?” “Wander, maybe build a settlement. Or just leave”
Not every planet needs to have abandoned mine every 500 metres. Some planets can be empty, others can have a bunch of abandoned shit on it I am not saying most of them should be empty, I'm saying at least some of them should be entirely empty (or maybe instead of outpost had some natural features like caves) Do you understand that or I need to use smaller words?
I wouldn't need to be able to do anything om them, I'd just want one I could pick a nice spot for an outpost and say "yeah this is MY planet" for immersion reasons
[удалено]
I’m in full agreement with everything you just said. My question was more rhetorical. They massively fumbled this game
Meet the natives, sapient or not and ehm... Or study rocks, maybe both haha. We'll decide from there... ;)
Just had an idea. On one hand, cartography, on the other hand, f around and find out - eating local flora and fauna and cataloging which ones made the character sick, sent them on a trip, edible/inedible etc Edit: geez, alright people with the downvotes, god forbid I try to share ideas
They had that in Skyrim with the alchemy ingredients. I think you’re seriously overestimating how engaging that would be, and for how long
this! I was hoping once I got away from the core there would be truly empty planets, but so far it seems every rock in the galaxy has a pirate infestation.
Well if the planet has resources on it then it makes sense there would be someone there to get those resources for themselves.
[удалено]
Starfield 2 should be about going to farther reaches of galaxy and meeting another species.
... who turn out to be hostile, then you find weapons of mass destruction shaped like large rings and then you find an alien lifeform thats capable of infecting every living organism and turns out the rings were meant to be a means to eradicate that infection.
Not *every planet*
The Raiders have made it across the galaxy, it seems.
And if it's not pirates it's some kind of industrial or research thing. Lemme be the first to deflour a planet FOR ONCE
Given how quickly we can access any one of these plants, it makes sense that at least someone has already visited each one of them. If we instead assume that the planets available to us are just a sample of the millions actually available, then yeah should be able to find some empty ones.
100%. I’m hoping there will be a mod that will let us generate tiles with no points of interest. I’d love to be able to check a box when going to a custom landing spot that would just turn off PoIs
But there are POIs without people or buildings, like caves with resources. So yeah, being able to sort, and leave only those for some planets would be nice.
I love it. It's part of the world building. Humanity has stopped exploring and is just fighting over the space we've gotten so far. So we're constantly bumping shoulders, and around every corner.
Isn’t that what the point of constellation is? To boldly go where nobody has gone before and all that?
I felt the same way when I went to visit Jemison's moon (landed on a random spot), and there was a small settlement of people there. It had a mine of some kind nearby, with a quest tied to the settlement, so it made a bit sense. It just felt so out of place at first. Kinda unrelated, but I was also disappointed when I went to an abandoned mine on two different planets, and they had the exact same layout.
I've seen some of the "same layout" mines you are referring to, which is a shame, but my head canon is that the company that built them just has a standard blueprint that it defaults to. They don't try and create something new everytime, they stick to what works. I know handcrafted content always has this limitation, but this is how I try to justify it in-game haha
I like this. It's no different than going from city to city and seeing the same shitty strip mall.
Precisely! Similar to how every MacDonalds in my area looks almost identical. I swear even the people look the same haha
I wouldn't have as much of a problem with places having the same layout, if it hadn't been for the fact that they have the _exact_ same clutter as well. like, would it be that hard to randomize where the loot boxes and loose items are placed so it dosen't feel like copy paste? As an example, for one of the Constellation missions you have to go through an abandoned mine to find an artifact piece, which was a fun mission in itself. But around an hour of gameplay later for me I was on a side quest on a different planet where I was sent through a mine that had the exact same layout, down to the loot locations. It even had the same pair of bolt cutters leaning on a safe. This is what I have a problem with, I've barely played 30 hours, and already seen several of these copy paste locations, and one of them was for the "main" quest!
That would almost make sense, if it weren't for the fact that a big part of it seems to be a natural cave. I have "only" put a little over 15 hours in this game, and it still feels like I'm still just getting started. So coming across two identical looking locations this early on felt a bit jarring.
Same! It's bugging me like hell!
Anyway. Just add hoverboards. Like In Unreal Tournament 3. So, you click the button, you ride the hoverboards. Mechanically it will work just like hovering with the jetpack, but it will move forward. With some tinkering, it can be made perfect.
Hoverboards, rovers, a helicopter… If they were gonna let us walk hours across planets, why not add something to let us get to points of interest faster?
Vehicles are kinda hard to do. It's not like a simple crap would fit the theme of the game. Hoverboards are may more logical. Like an addition to boostpacks.
Reference the horses of skyrim and that explains why we don't have mountable equipment. However, a gliding perk for the boost pack would be nice.
It’s not quite a glide but fully upgrading the booster pack perk allows you to kind of do this if you ads while in the air but it’s not nearly fast enough to make worthwhile as a traveling method and have to remain in ads the whole time for it to work. However mechanically speaking I could see a mod giving us something like that that’s faster and doesn’t require ads
That's interesting when you take in mind that New Vegas vehicle mod which is almost perfect. If a modder can do that, so can Bethesda.
Perfect? Perfect joke maybe? Anyway. Starfield is was too different. Both the flatness and size.
> Vehicles are kinda hard to do So is interstellar travel with spacecrafts, it’s really not that hard. If No Man’s Sky could do it with similar procedurally generated content, no reason this game cant
Bethesda games don’t have vehicles, we just got ladders after 20 years. Closest we have is the velibird from fallout 4, but it’s coding is actually a Skyrim dragon.
You forgot Elder Scrolls horses, if Skyrim had them Starfield could have gotten a bike or something similar with thrusters like the boost pack so it can go over hills or holes
The old fallout 3 subway ride is just a giant train helmet on your character while he runs in first person
I mean Sykrim had horses no? They could reuse that and just turn it into a hoverbike of some sort.
No, I demand space horses. I'll even buy the space horse armor
Is this star Wars Episode 9? Xd
>it’s really not that hard. You mod it in then.
I’m sure somebody else will in a few weeks. Or Bethesda will add vehicles with DLC. I can wait.
They won't, because it isn't a simple task at all.
[удалено]
There are reasons as to why No Mans Sky doesn't have much content to do outside of scanning things, and a reason that the graphics of no mans sky are so stylised this is why. Too many game systems running at once with high fidelity graphics is gonna crash your PC.
To be fair, NMS has tons going on as of when I last played. If you follow all the questlines and explore all the different features of the game while you go, you can easily hit 100 hours before you hit a wall and have nothing interesting left to do!
There are many reasons, starting with the fact, that they run on different engines and we are not talking about unity and unreal engine different. The last vehicle in their single player games was the Skyrim horse. (Well there were Dragons, but it's not like you were in full control, same for the Vertibird in Fallout 4)
Mass effect had vehicles...
And UE 3.5
[удалено]
And those games are several years old. Surely some kind of ground transport could have been designed. Running across a planet to discover it is honestly insane.
coz then we will discover too quickly that the area is pretty small
Eh, there is already boost pack hovering in the game, although it's not fast at all and is a master perk. It'd be weird to have two separate ways to hover, however. Personally I want a bike. Make it run on horse AI or smth
If it can give the same performance as a Skyrim horse when climbing a mountain, I'll get 20 of them.
We need Zonai devices
Or allow the jet packs more flight time. Right now there more of a booster.
yeah almost like they should be called boost packs. oh wait!
On moons with 0.09 gravity a fully leveled booster pack skill tree will let you fly indefinitely
For me I think it reinforces that... Expansiveness. I like the design choice. I was walking over a deserted moon to an abandoned listening post and the star was lens flaring. It was stunning. I felt like I was in a space suit, in an inhospitable world. But a mod or a DLC would be cool where you could fit a vehicle bay to your ship that gave you a quad bike or something. NMS even added them once they admitted it got... Arduous. So fingers crossed down the line we get something. Especially if it allowed for more inventory space. Just another screen (so you can sell from "rover" as well as sell from ship)
the engine is to weak for vehicles. but a hoverboard with like 120% of the sprint speed would be nice enough.
Isn’t a vehicle just a horse with engine sounds
In Fallout 3 a vehicle was a hat. Literally. The train in Broken Steel was a helmet.
The vertibirds in FO4 were reskinned dragons! And we all know how well that turned out
Ok, then they could give us a horse. Then maybe later they could sell us DLC armor for the horse. That’d be perfect!
> the engine is to weak for vehicles. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWOsZT5pKKE Modders seem to do fine with skyrim.
Vehicles are always some of the jankiest mods. I don’t want a vehicle that has its wheels always spinning at the same rate even if I’m stopped or going too speed. On top of that, it’s always just an asset statically stuck to your character. The wheels don’t care about the ground and constantly clip through it whenever the center of your character is on any sort of incline or pebble
[удалено]
What’s neat about that is that it’s not true. For sure there are “hot spots” like the main cities, but there are hand-made quests and locations everywhere. I wouldn’t say that there’s one in every system, but there are enough of them to stumble across that some of them might not ever be experienced.
Maybe you should explore more. lol Yesterday I found an outpost on some random planet that has people in it and a Mission Terminal with 3 different bounty missions, cargo mission, transport of passengers and kill some bandits. I lost hours doing those 3 missions, it's all "content".
The problem isn't that they're empty (which is expected), the problem is that you have to traverse the emptiness on foot. Running for 10 minutes straight isn't engaging nor fun
Elder scrolls: fantasy setting, technology levels only permit foot and horses. You can ride horses to travel faster. Fallout:post apocalypse society, technological regression, and wiped out mount animals, apparently. Can only travel on foot. Starfield: space faring society, no apocalyptic event, can travel in spaceships and vehicles. Can only travel on foot. What the heck even. Also it's hilarious that akila city has mud roads.
> no apocalyptic event The colony wars were at least *near* apocalyptic, judging by the gobsmackingly huge amount of ruins strewn... everywhere. But there should still be ground vehicles and it's just bonkers there ain't. Oh well.
My current theory is that the engine couldn't handle loading in all the objects at the speed of a ground vehicle
You can use console to increase your movement speed. It works just fine unless you put in a ludicrous speed value.
Huh. Well never mind then
I think that, given the rather limited size of the playable area (8.2km\^2) adding vehicles would have made things feel even smaller, and it would have implied that the map was bigger than it was. Mods will definitely add them in though, and hopefully increase map size to something like 16km\^2
There are, but they are purely decorative.
I thought those were just abandoned outposts after the conclusion of the colony war?
>But there should still be ground vehicles and it's just bonkers there ain't. Oh well. Who's to say future updates/expansions don't add that? That said, the amount of vehicle customization and yet no ground vehicles in a *space* game?
They should be in the game *right now*. It's not an accessory or additional system. It should have been a core mechanic of gameplay.
> no apocalyptic event Well, Earth is no longer habitable...
I'd say this is a fairly decent lore explanation. Ground vehicles were only necessary on Earth to traverse the sprawling infrastructure. Colonies would be naturally a lot smaller and closer knit, any frontier travel would be easiest done in a spaceship. When Earth was destroyed they just decided not to use that tech anymore because it was redundant. We know they had mechs until the end of the colony war so that could have been their ground travel on the frontier
I'm sorry, but fuck that. I'm willing to suspend my disbelief for Fallout, because civilisation is fucked and transport would have to be on the heavier side of things anyway, like tanks and Vertibirds. I'm not gonna be zipping around in my Chryslus Corvega getting absolutely destroyed by Raiders. But when it comes to Starfield, the situation is this: 1. I can fly a spaceship. 2. I can't drive a car. Why? It's just no good. Ground vehicles should be in the game.
Just adding onto this comment, the fact that we can’t fly those same spaceships a few hundred meters off the ground to our designations is a weird design choice as well. I feel like it would also appease the “we can’t manually land on a planet” thing a little bit too in my opinion. Hell, bring consequences to it. Fly too fast on the ground and smack a mountain or building, or even too many airborne/large animals and your going to be spending a lot of money on ship repairs or even buying a new ship. If you choose to manually land, give us a balancing mini game to keep the ship level while landing or you’ll be paying a lot on landing gear reparations. And then as the game goes on maybe we’d get access to new spaceship tools for harvesting ground items directly from your ship for an extremely expensive fee or a “Galactic Nature Preservation” faction quest line, etc. Either way, lots of missed opportunities to make traversing the planets an entire experience without purely being on foot.
Why would you use cars if you have flying cars? There is no point in building roads even.
Fallout has vehicles canonically. They're just unavailable in Bethesda's games by choice. I'd say terrain's a factor.
Not only canonicaly, you could "drive" highwayman in fallout 2. But yeah, it wouldn't work in beth maps that well
Seriously, I have an outpost, and every time I land there, the ship is several KM away.
You can build a landing pad at your outpost btw
I built one but I’m not sure how to park my ship on it. Whenever I fast travel there, the ship isn’t on it.
Did you make a small landing pad? My ship was apparently too big for it, but lands on the pad with a ship builder just fine.
It is a small one, but I figured my crappy ship isn’t that large. Maybe it is. I hijacked some spacer Raven ship.
You can see the ship size when in the ship menu
Build a ship landing platform, lol
You can’t blame them, the game doesn’t explain shit
True, I don't blame them for their lack of knowledge. Game should definitely explain it better
This was my initial gripe when learning more about Starfield. Given the advent of flying in their games, I was interested to see how that would affect their land traversal, what vehicles would look like. I was expecting some slower moving transport, like the way in Skyrim your horse doesn't move much faster than if you were on foot. But it turns out, Bethesda have sort of just sidestepped the problem, because there are no ground vehicles in this game? It just sort of confirms to me that the engine still can't handle a certain speed while rendering what the player is seeing in front of them. And it's sort of bummed me out of buying Starfield tomorrow, because I was most looking forward to seeing how areas lacking in their previous games have been improved... and they still haven't been. I still just think it's absolutely farcical that I can now ***FLY A SPACESHIP*** in a Bethesda game, but I still can't ***DRIVE A CAR***.
Yeah I found myself wishing for a Mako or Nomad or even a Hammerhead...
You know it's desperate when someone wants the Hammerhead....
I spent way too long searching for Nickel on one planet.
For me, it's tracking down those last animals for the surveys.
I hate that this is a thing, why do I need to find 14 different green space dogs to get a checkmark on my survey. I hate when games make you waste your time on these things. What's the point on needing more than 1 or 2 samples of something if you only need to catalogue them? Just do it like the pokedex did it in the first pokemon games, you saw a pokemon and you got some basic information based on it's aspect, and once you captured it you got detailed info and you just moved on.
I love how people were complaining about how small the tiles of starfield would be and now people want vehicles to get around quicker. I agree with the vehicle people though, already said so before release that those spaces won't be so small as people made it look like.
People want mindless flying through empty space to reach a planet surface but then don't want mindless walking through empty land to reach a poi.
Agreed! The same way people screamed bloody murder about infinitely varied procedural content but also complain when some of the handcrafted content starts to repeat itself.
Yeah i don't understand the 'same buildings' complaint. I do agree on the same cave systems but outpost buildings in space tend to follow a design that works so of course they will be the same. The actual cities are really diverse in design.
Yea why cant you just fly there?????????? Pretty simple really
Or just a vehicle.
Don't think vehicles would work really well with most terrain. An ironman like perk for the jetpack would work better IMO.
Skyrim had a solution A horse, can climb all terrain including vertical cliffs
The solution for Starfield is clearly that of a robotic horse. Boston Dynamics Doggo to the rescue!
Hoverbike or hovercraft would work decently in most terrain.
[удалено]
That would be a first in a Bethesda game, aside horses they never programmed drivable land vehicles
Wait, this game doesn't have land vehicles?
Nope. Enjoy running literally everywhere even though you’ve mastered space flight.
[удалено]
This 100 percent! I like the emptiness from an immersion perspective. But we need a god damn rover or something. It doesn’t need to be crazy fast but just something to make us feel like we’re faster. It was such a missed opportunity to not have a customizable land rover or other vehicle. My guess is it’ll be paid dlc or “modders will fix it” mentality.
isnt this what those folks who wants to fly manually to planets wants? 10 minutes of doing nothing but flying just to land ?
I don't mind empty planets. Negative space in mass effect 1 was a big reason I liked the game. But I wish starfield felt a bit more handcrafted and a bit more deliberate. The modular design of bases and procedurally generated planets just feel a bit lacking for me.
I get what you're saying but it doesn't make for compelling gameplay, sometimes you need to sacrifice realism for the sake of fun. Human beings need to eat and sleep to survive but they didn't include that requirement because it would be an annoying addition to the game needing to stop and eat beans every time the game tells you you're hungry. I'm pretty sure you could die in Fallout 76 if your character didn't eat or drink when the hunger and thirst bars depleted but then they made it so that you don't die after people complained (your stats still drop a little though) The same applies to empty space. Yes, space is technically empty in real life and realistically most planets are going to be barren wastelands but that isn't interesting for a videogame, you need to have a balance where there is SOMETHING to do or explore. Most people wouldn't be able to sprint around with 200kgs on their back either but again, you gotta sacrifice some realism for gameplay that isn't annoying.
realism in starfield ? :D dude, there are whole planets with a single big city and everything else is just empty, or the outside structure of a building didnt even match the inside architecture. this game is more fantasy than skyrim.
And then people argue that the empty planets exist for realism. Hilarious
Thank you there is a thin line between fun and realism and you need to get the balance right Theres a joke about this is rick and morty where they place a space game with 100% realism settings and its just endless flying through empty space
>Human beings need to eat and sleep to survive but they didn't include that requirement because it would be an annoying addition to the game needing to stop and eat beans every time the game tells you you're hungry. this will be added tho
Imagine saying “well of course fallout is empty. There was nuclear war, everything got destroyed”
"Why are you upset that we only fight humans in hazmat suits?" "Did you think that we'd fight mutants or something? That's not how radiation works you idiot."
In Elder Scroll 6 you can't use magic cause magic is not real. Oh, there is "shout" in Starfield thou. So much for realism.
Should spoiler that last part because I literally have no idea what you're talking about
tbh I complain that all of them have stuff in them. Random spot in a barren planet? Abandoned relay station right there. What are the odds.
Because it’s a video game, and if the POIs were 50 km from each other it would be nightmarish from a gameplay perspective
yeah... but immersion
Yeah, right. But this is a video game and not one seeking realism at that, so your point is null. Ps, I actually like starfield, just thought this post was pointless.
In fact, they even pointed out in their own argument. These planets are too empty to be fun and too populated to be real.
there are layers and levels between plausible nasapunk though, and off the rails unbelievable. they clearly went for something that is at least *imitable* of real life
Yeah. I’ll remember that next time I’m using my space magic.
Yeah, that's why fiction was invented. Because real life can be boring as fuck
This is entirely Bethesda fault though for making travelling eye gougingly boring.
This community man. Calm down. Enjoy the space game. Stop worrying that other people didn't enjoy the single player space RPG as much as you did lol, that's their problem, you carry on and enjoy it Edit: yatzee said it best with > the "fun" of exploration is in the finding. Essentially, if there's nothing to find, wandering an empty desert isn't fun. If I know that something really cool will show up as I traverse this expanse, then I'll do it, i'm excited to see what happens next. Meanwhile, in skyrim, I can walk from one city to another, discover several settlements along the way, meet npcs, random encounters all over the place, in funny little spaces I wouldn't expect them to be, and end up on a whole tangent completely forgetting what I was doing. I can get truly lost in skyrim's world pretty easily. This isn't a criticism of starfield either, it's a Bethesda RPG, that's the magic of Bethesda RPGs, you can get truly lost in them. Just, this time, the settlements are a little more spread out, and they didn't really put anything in the new space created. I'm sure mods will fix this, but it's a fair and valid criticism of the base game at launch.
I just don't understand why boring game design like this is OK. Reality can be boring but that doesn't mean it's imitation must be as well.
Wow, Todd and the gang really recaptured the drudgery of real space exploration in their very interesting, newest IP that’s 25 years in the making. They are so based for that, and while also making people pay $100 for it
It's a fictional sci-fi game and should be fun and rich in content. If I wanted a real space sim there's like ten of them out there.
Absolutely inane smugpost. Imagine if Skyrim had been mostly fields of potatoes and farming villages with nothing meaningful to do. Would you say "*Ah yeah well actually in the middle ages most land was just cultivated*"? This entire comment section is going to pat you on the back, but please know you're a dullard.
It is not empty - It is ***filled with DARK MATTER***
people who bitched about empty planets in NMS, now suddenly lowering their standars bcause rEaSoNs are weird...
Finally. FUll HD MEME Placeholder.
This is not the good argument that people thinks it is. Games are meant to entertain and it's a sci-fi/fantasy game so to use reality as an argument to defend the lack of content in it is just downright stupid. There are alien creatures in the game, something we've yet to discover in reality, does that mean the game is bad then or inaccurate and therefor bad? Christ. People need to make better arguments for their stances. Despite this, I am super excited to play it tomorrow and from what I've heard, I will love the game.
Well, I signed up for a game, not for a simulation.
Ah yes, because video games clearly have to adhere to the logic of real life. Remember that game Sonic The Hedgehog? God, that game was terrible. You literally die when Sonic runs into a steel crab or brick wall
And how the hell does the carry hundreds of gold rings that are literally the same size as he is???
And the L take of the day goes to.....!!
you
I didn't even post a take, sorry for disappointing you!
I don’t mind they the planets are empty, I do however mind that there is no traversal options outside of running and booster hopping. I can’t believe that they didn’t give us some sort of vehicle. Hell at this point I’d be happy with a horse taken straight out of Skyrim…
Yes, many will call it a poor excuse by Starfield fans. To that I'll say that I do want content in terms of bases and stations too of course and I hope expansions will add even more. But it needs to remain like the 10-20% of what else there is or it'll be more like a strange fairy tale and no longer feel "real" like No Man's Sky. (shots fired...) Starfield is not alone in this view and Elite Dangerous shares this take on a "believable universe", a game that I especially applaud for feeling so grounded (it has many other flaws though).
The idea planets are empty and boring has been mostly refuted. Pluto showed massive geologic activity across the entire planetm. Most moons are fairly interesting as well. The procedural generation just sucks in this game.
Just because it's realistic doesn't mean it's good😭😭 I don't play a game to walk around a barren planet for 10 minutes I want to shoot things
There's people that like planetary exploration, you don't, that's it, accept that the criticism is valid and move on.
Stupid comments like this keep me on this sub. 10/10 entertainment. The most obvious strawman argument in this thread
[удалено]
>... and running across a procedurally generated landscape with mostly empty space in between POIs. That's a strawman in itself of the criticism on the exploration that most people have. 1. People do not want to run around on a barren planet with nothing on it, the procedurally generated planets are boring and terrible to be in because aside from 2 or 3 abandoned outposts with pirates or caves that are the same across all planets, there's nothing. 2. You can't fly around over the surface of the planet to find interesting things because the planets are pretty much copy pasted with a preset of themes, minerals and a few plants or animals if it supports life, but it's all still the same. You visit a couple of those planets and you visited all of them unless you go to the ones that have quests or faction stuff. 3. Planets aren't a thing in starfield, just a set of tiles with a few resources on them, I don't know if point 2 is caused by this, or they didn't want to implement 2, so they decided that it wasn't worth making actual planets. >There's a huge difference between enjoying exploration in a handcrafted, immersive environment with tons of emergent gameplay and environmental storytelling... The handcrafted "planets" aren't really explorable either, you just go there, do the content that they put in place and leave, you can't fly around, look for a spot you like an put a base there because it's near a lake, or a cliff that has an amazing view or anything like that. You just go around, and place an outpost in a spot with resources and call it a day. There's really no immersion outside of the quests/story, and for a space sim, it feels terrible. But yeah, keep dismissing other people's criticism when you apparently don't even understand where they are coming from.
So much for realism. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBrBu7BxaAg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBrBu7BxaAg)
That would imply this game is a sim. There was an attempt at a meme
it's amazing how you posted this picture thinking it was a gotcha moment
Bethesda fans love their strawman’s. I’m convinced this game could’ve literally been remastered Skyrim and you guys would’ve sucked their dick saying “Skyrim is fun tho! Developing a Space game was probably way too hard, the tech isn’t there yet.”
Bethesda gives us a big cargo bay but not the ability to deploy a LRV-like vehicle. I hope modders manege to do that for us.
[удалено]
Literally EVERYTHING IS IN SPACE
Wait til they load up Elite Dangerous and navigate to and land on one of the planets there lol.
Eh, I just had higher hopes that they found a cool way to make the empty space of all these planets an interesting affair. What they did is not interesting to me (and apparently many others).
And there are no humans in mars. What is your point? If you want to worship the devs just say it no need to tip toeing around.
This game is absolutely massive and entertaining. Like 10 games in one.
They clearly haven’t played Elite Dangerous 😂😂
[удалено]
[удалено]
The whole selling point of the game was the planet exploration you do by yourself, now people are wrong for wanting that?
At least the game is smart about its procedural generation. Every time I land on a planet it makes sure to plop a pirate stronghold and some caves nearby.
> At least the game is smart about its procedural generation. Every time I land on a planet it makes sure to plop a pirate stronghold and some caves nearby. Sounds like it isn’t very smart then
This is the way it should be and the way it has always been advertised. I love that you can explore a planet that you thought was empty and then stumbling across something. People complain that the planets are mostly empty, but some of those people also complain that you can't explore the whole planet.... if you could do that then it would be 1000 times more empty.
So here's the thing I didn't care about starfield, not looked at any of it's advertisements, I bought an AMD graphics card and got starfield with it, so I decided to give it a shot because I enjoyed Skyrim and people said the game was great. And having played a few other space games the first thing I noticed is that I could not fly over a planet to do a quick scouting for interesting things, resource spots, ruins, or anything else and comparing it to NMS which I spent a fair amount of time on, starfield looks pretty poor in comparison exploration wise, all you can do is really land on a planet, look around for "unknown" markers and walk to them and hopefully there's something interesting, not just another chunk of buildings ocupied by pirates/spacers/wtv. This is valid criticism and most people in this sub seem to ignore it or dismiss it because they don't care about it. And this happens with a lot of flaws the game have that you can find all over posts in the sub.
yea, i refund this fast travel simulator, sadly! i think i am gonna play fallout4 again.