Video Game Chatter

Genghis Khan said:
How so? I haven't played it but I loved all the Witchers. But I know Cyberpunk got a lot of criticism.
Click to expand...
It was a mess at launch, but fixed through patches and an expansion. The city feels alive. Sometimes I just drive around and marvel at the detail.
 
Genghis Khan said:
How so? I haven't played it but I loved all the Witchers. But I know Cyberpunk got a lot of criticism.
Click to expand...

I wasn't crazy about it and neither were my other buddies who were huge Witcher fans.

Basically, don't go in expecting a futuristic version of that experience because you'll be very disappointed.
 
Texas Ace said:
I wasn't crazy about it and neither were my other buddies who were huge Witcher fans.

Basically, don't do in expecting a futuristic version of that experience because you'll be very disappointed.
Click to expand...


My impression is more of a futuristic GTA.
 
Texas Ace said:
@1bigfan13

How's the custom conference season going?

They released a big update a week ago that was supposed to address some of the scheduling issues in dynasty mode and I am definitely seeing the difference.... At least with standard conferences.

Is it better with custom conferences too?
Click to expand...
So far so good. I got the update a couple of days after I'd already started my dynasty. Hopefully after I finish the season I'll be able to see the improvements.
 
Texas Ace said:
I wasn't crazy about it and neither were my other buddies who were huge Witcher fans.

Basically, don't go in expecting a futuristic version of that experience because you'll be very disappointed.
Click to expand...

Agree. It’s no Witcher. Not even close. Very disappointing that the story, the world, were all so poor in comparison. It’s very soulless.

But… if it hadn’t been from the same studio that made the Witcher it would have been a very fine game. Not an all timer, but playable and enjoyable. There were some very polished parts including gunplay.

Much of the angst was because of expectations.
 
Smitty said:
Agree. It’s no Witcher. Not even close. Very disappointing that the story, the world, were all so poor in comparison. It’s very soulless.
Click to expand...

Yup, that about sums it up right.
 
Smitty said:
Agree. It’s no Witcher. Not even close. Very disappointing that the story, the world, were all so poor in comparison. It’s very soulless.

But… if it hadn’t been from the same studio that made the Witcher it would have been a very fine game. Not an all timer, but playable and enjoyable. There were some very polished parts including gunplay.

Much of the angst was because of expectations.
Click to expand...

Yeah I never played Cyberpunk. The Witcher was based on the books. Part of me wonders if the reason it has such great soul as you put it is because they were able to pull from great source material. Cyberpunk got such bad initial reviews that I never got around to giving it a chance so I can't really judge it. I've heard it got a lot better with fixes.

Frankly I had high hopes for Starfield as well because I loved Fallout and Skyrim. Starfield was fun for a bit but eventually I tired of it because of sort of the same feeling. Maybe not soul less but eventually the world just felt repetitive and boring. The depth really wasn't there.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Starfield was fun for a bit but eventually I tired of it because of sort of the same feeling. Maybe not soul less but eventually the world just felt repetitive and boring. The depth really wasn't there.
Click to expand...


Exactly how I feel. It's a decent game but it desperately needs more content. The main quest was weak, and NG+ got very very repetitive and not worth the effort of going through just to make your character stronger and the off chance that something changed.

I actually stopped playing Starfield to go back to Fallout 4. I originally hated that Fallout but it turns out I like the game, it's just the main quest I hated with a white hot passion.

It's funny but it's way more interesting to explore in Fallout than Starfield despite Starfield having the entirety of space.
 
Genghis Khan said:
It's funny but it's way more interesting to explore in Fallout than Starfield despite Starfield having the entirety of space.
Click to expand...

It may be realistic but space is just empty. And eventually once you complete the faction stuff it really just felt like you were exploring nothing. And I was really excited because I've always liked Bethesda games but I think I prefer one densely packed city over exploring a vast nothing.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
It may be realistic but space is just empty. And eventually once you complete the faction stuff it really just felt like you were exploring nothing. And I was really excited because I've always liked Bethesda games but I think I prefer one densely packed city over exploring a vast nothing.
Click to expand...


Yep. Compare that to how for example mass effect handled space travel and exploration. There are ways to do it where you don't feel like there's nothing to do.

I get that mass effect isn't really an open world and Starfield is, but there are ways to do it. They sacrificed quality for quantity.

And I hate putting the game down because I did enjoy it, but it could have been so much better.

And this game is the main reason that there's no new elder scrolls yet, and it wasn't worth it.
 
Genghis Khan said:
And I hate putting the game down because I did enjoy it, but it could have been so much better.

And this game is the main reason that there's no new elder scrolls yet, and it wasn't worth it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I mean I got my money worth on Starfield so it's probably not fair to complain too much. I enjoyed it for awhile and logged a decent amount of hours. It's just I had excitement levels for something special. Especially since it basically made Elder Scrolls take a back burner. But I was hoping for a game like Skyrim that just felt like something special. The same way Witcher was when I played it. I had a sense of completing something epic or special at the end. Starfield was more of just an eh, that was fun. Built a cool ship but I'm bored now.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
Yeah I never played Cyberpunk. The Witcher was based on the books. Part of me wonders if the reason it has such great soul as you put it is because they were able to pull from great source material. Cyberpunk got such bad initial reviews that I never got around to giving it a chance so I can't really judge it. I've heard it got a lot better with fixes.

Frankly I had high hopes for Starfield as well because I loved Fallout and Skyrim. Starfield was fun for a bit but eventually I tired of it because of sort of the same feeling. Maybe not soul less but eventually the world just felt repetitive and boring. The depth really wasn't there.
Click to expand...

Cyberpunk was substantially better than Starfield. I’ll say that. Again, a large part of why cyberpunk was so ill received was it was expected to be another Witcher but wasn’t.

Bethesda can’t put out a game with any soul anymore so not sure why people expect it.
 
Genghis Khan said:
Exactly how I feel. It's a decent game but it desperately needs more content. The main quest was weak, and NG+ got very very repetitive and not worth the effort of going through just to make your character stronger and the off chance that something changed.

I actually stopped playing Starfield to go back to Fallout 4. I originally hated that Fallout but it turns out I like the game, it's just the main quest I hated with a white hot passion.

It's funny but it's way more interesting to explore in Fallout than Starfield despite Starfield having the entirety of space.
Click to expand...

There is no open world for Starfield, that’s why. It is the worse part of Bethesda games - the cities only, which are too small and samey and repetitive, plus a procedurally generated boring wasteland that they replicate into 1000 planets. But there isn’t even enough variety in their randomness to be interesting. It’s like the same 3 enemies on every planet.
 
Smitty said:
There is no open world for Starfield, that’s why. It is the worse part of Bethesda games - the cities only, which are too small and samey and repetitive, plus a procedurally generated boring wasteland that they replicate into 1000 planets. But there isn’t even enough variety in their randomness to be interesting. It’s like the same 3 enemies on every planet.
Click to expand...

Yeah mission takes you to a cool outpost. You complete mission and then start to explore and realize there is basically nothing outside of that mission on the planet. They tried so hard with the procedurally generated stuff but it fell flat and just left you with an empty experience. Like I said, I had fun with the faction quests. After I completed all of those it got very boring to me.

And even at that part of the fun of Bathesda games was that I didn't feel like I had to do all the factions. But in Starfield it almost felt mandatory because there wasn't much else to do except fly to planet, get power, move on to next planet over and over.
 
@1bigfan13 @Smitty @Cowboysrock55

NERD ALERT

I don't know what passing setting you guys are using, but Revamped Passing is where it's at.

If you work though the early struggles and take the time to learn it, there's no throw you can't make.

Check out my highlights in 4K:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom