Bethesda’s latest can’t help but feel shallow by comparison.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They still average about 6 years per major release… Fallout 4 came in 2015, and if you don’t count Fallout 76 as a major release, that was only 8 years ago, right in line with the dev time they’ve pretty much always had.

    Honestly all I see with starfield that failed to meet expectations are one good and one bad:

    Good: The performance and stability are actually good for once. This was unexpected, but welcome.

    Bad: The writing and story are boring, bland, generic, and uninteresting. This wasn’t expected because usually this stuff is at least semi-decent. There’s usually something that at least has a cool basis. Starfield doesn’t. It’s all references and tropes and nothing particularly interesting or unique. It’s hard to even be motivated to wanna shoot bad guys beyond “well, they’re the bad guys and I am here to shoot 🤷🏻‍♂️.”

    • @Poob@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      We didn’t expect the story to be bad? The only games of theirs that had good stories were Daggerfall and Morrowind. Oblivion’s story was… fine at best. Skyrim’s was hot garbage. Daggerfall’s story is pretty impenetrable too.

      I honestly can’t remember more than a handful of characters in any of their games. Of the characters I do remember, I think the jester assassin from the dark brotherhood is the only one I had any kind of affection for.

    • Silverseren
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And the issue is that even their best games, like New Vegas, show their age. None of their past writing in games stands up to modern levels of expectation for big budget video games. The fact that Starfield isn’t any better and is perhaps at even a slightly lower level than their previous games just makes it seem too outdated.