:.:. Starfield .:.: - by Vae
Sulphur on 19/12/2023 at 09:11
I wish Emil did defend Starfield from its shortcomings, but what he said was that people who think they know about gamedev don't know why Starfield ended up the way it did. That is very different from shitting on people who have a bad opinion about it - it's a mass deficit of reading comprehension which you, and many of the people responding to it with a kneejerk �� reflex have.
Emil also isn't Bethesda PR or PC Gamer. The review response issue is a completely different problem - Beth PR's stupidity in responding to negative reviews is their own, and there's really not much to defend there. Beth as a corporate entity isn't particularly smart about dealing with people.
vurt on 19/12/2023 at 09:21
Dude, we know what he's saying, of course he is defending its shortcomings and in a really lame way. We don't need to know about how the game is made to criticize it.
Again, there's a difference of writing a post about game development vs attacking fans (or some super tiny minority with very shitty takes - who cares?).. a game development post can be an interesting read.
you're even saying it yourself without realizing it "why Starfield ended up the way it did". That doesn't sound like you mean it ended up particularly great yet you claim "but not because I think it's shit." sure buddy.
Sulphur on 19/12/2023 at 09:25
Well, if all this is just going to reduce down to 'I'm going to ignore context and basically any sort of nuance or detail to this conversation because how dare someone say something in my vague general direction on the internet,' I might as well just do the same thing and say your argument boils down to the single most boring thing on the internet.
Inline Image:
https://i.imgur.com/nuZpPyqm.jpgQuote Posted by vurt
you're even saying it yourself without realizing it
"why Starfield ended up the way it did". That doesn't sound like you mean it ended up particularly great.
Okay this deserves it: L M F A O. I've been saying exactly that I don't think it's a great game all throughout this entire thread, Einstein.
Starker on 19/12/2023 at 09:40
No matter whether I agree with them or not (though in this case I do), I would very much prefer for individual developers to voice their opinions on matters of game development and game criticism or whatever topic they wish to speak about on their personal blogs and social media. The alternative to that is that we only get to hear bland corporate speak from the PR departments of companies and lawyerly crafted messages.
vurt on 19/12/2023 at 09:43
Sulphur, nope, you said it "isn't for me" and you also said "not because I think it's shit". Einstein.
Ignoring context? It's the entire context of the post, what other purpose does it have? Is he writing an interesting post about game development, no he isn't.
Sulphur on 19/12/2023 at 09:51
I think I've wasted fewer words here on people who were comparably better able to understand what was going on. Lesson to me, I suppose. You're always learning something new on the internet!
zomfg1234 on 19/12/2023 at 14:55
It's a big flop regardless of how valid or invalid criticism is, Starfield barely crosses 200 (!) viewers on Twitch, that signals a completely abysmal retention rate when you consider the actual scope, people care more about talking how shit the game is rather than actually playing it. It's hard to fix too because it's genuinely ugly, soulless and poorly written. Everything about it reeks of pure shit. I could come up with a more thought out critique, but seeing how clowns like Emil continue to work in Bethesda despite having poor results over and over, my words would go into the void. Fuck this game and fuck this company.
EvaUnit02 on 20/12/2023 at 06:26
Quote Posted by Anarchic Fox
My ME problems are numerous, but this isn't one of them. Suspension of belief is not the player's sole responsibility, but rather shared between player and studio.
We aren't talking about Starfield, with your words we've established they have trouble suspending disbelief with stealth in any game with guns. Such a broad concepts being deal breakers eliminate potentially hundreds of games. Almost the entirety of the game industry must be wrong, not you, right? Continuing with your established opinion things like gun magazines that are magically refilled upon reload must bother you too. I'll say it again, concessions to realism are often made to make a more enjoyable product for the majority of their target audience.
If you want realism there are tactical police/military sims still being made. Maybe no longer from mainstream AAA publishers like in the 2000's, but they're still coming to market.
Your weirdo sentiment reminds of the mouth breathers who claim that they can't get into a film's story because they can't disassociate Actor X from Past Prominent Role Y.
Quote Posted by Anarchic Fox
If you truly possess the ability to suspend your disbelief entirely while playing something like, say, Starfield, then your capability for immersion is superhuman. But with how often I see you complain about games, I doubt you're so immersed.
I can easily still criticise a piece of art's flaws and still be able to enjoy things for what they are most of the time, unlike you.
Quote Posted by Sulphur
I'm curious as to what the emoji are.
Shrugging woman.
The forum software was last updated like 15 years ago? Not surprised at all that it doesn't display standardised emojis.
Anarchic Fox on 20/12/2023 at 08:32
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
I can easily still criticise a piece of art's flaws and still be able to enjoy things for what they are most of the time, unlike you.
:tsktsk:
FFS, EvaUnit. You were THIS close to having a productive discussion on TTLG, for the first time in years. It would have been a Christmas miracle.
Thanks again for the link.
Malf on 20/12/2023 at 11:58
There's a reason RSSBot is the only person on TTLG on my ignore list. Nothing of value is lost by ignoring it.
