The only cultural footprint Starfield has had is the 1-2 hour long YouTube reviews analyzing how profoundly bad it is. Modders don't even want to mod it.
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
The only cultural footprint Starfield has had is the 1-2 hour long YouTube reviews analyzing how profoundly bad it is.
No, I am sure your everyday posts count too
A phenomenon that exists only within your autistic board culture zeitgeist isn't comparable
It exists in all social media anon. Everything talked about here, is talked about everywhere. And usually with the same amount of autism lmao.
Disingenuous post, if you weren't terminally online you'd realize no one gives a shit
Of course not, anon. Nobody uses social media. Its not like its a huge part of our lives, practically integrated into our everyday lives and communication with our everyday echo chambers, like yours lmao.
in few years we will have videos analyzing starfield as a finkpunk masterpiece.
>"Starfield is Not as Bad as We Think it is(Yes, Even That Part)"
>proceed to plot summarization
What an absolute c**t why is she so miserable its free food would it fricking kill her just to be a little appreciative
>proceed to plot summarization
one of the basic things I was taught in school when writing essays was that summarizing the plot is not the point of an essay. yet every youtube reviewer, whether it's movies or videogames, always feels the need to recall the entire plot
It’s because the videos that do this aren’t aimed at people who actually played it, hence why they need to give the context/let the viewer be able to bullshit their way into discussions with people who have
Yeah it’s odd. These people speak as if they were unable to even complete school yet gather millions of followers. I think zoomers just really enjoy being told what to think.
No, we like hearing our own opinions repeated back at us.
Yes, after a few years, when people have found something newer to hate, they'll be able to look at the game more objectively and realize that it wasn't bad. That's how it works.
>it wasn't bad.
Thats not the case with starfield, its bad, or rather just mediocre and bland.
>That's how it works.
People have gotten more & more negative towards skyrim & fallout 4 with time, not less, no reason to think this will be any different.
because they're morons. Games that were virtually unplayable at launch like AC: Unity and CP2077 are now redeemed for whatever reason. All it does is incentivize devs to realize more half-finished garbage.
Say what you will about Skyim, at least it was a finished product.
>Say what you will about Skyim, at least it was a finished product.
homie what
do you not remember skyrim's release? or were you just not born yet?
game was so bugged out the ass that it released with zero compiler optimizations, including using x87 for all floating point calculations because apparently using SSE was too hard for bethesda. x87 was deprecated by AMD and Intel back in 2003 and bethesda built their 2011 game around it
modders had to fix it and then bethesda fixed it later
Most people arguing in favour of skyrim love it because it was their first A'R'PG when they were in their teens. Its like the Halo Reach gays.
This is why this whole shit is entirely manufactured. These people honestly somehow gaslit themselves that Skyrim wasn’t a buggy, broken POS and actually LOOKED good despite all the fricking mods that practically give life to that shit looking world.
There are people here that were born after skyrim released, they didn't play it at that stage
Further evidence that this manufactured outrage will also die its own fricking death and it will be completely irrelevant in years to come.
Your PC must've sucked back then. Hope you're still not a poorgay, anon.
Unless you’re about to say that Creation looked good for its time (it did not), you’re a fricking zoomer otherwise. I remember how Skyrim launched.
>AC: Unity
>redeemed
In no way has that even been implied, CP2077 was thanks to the timing of the anime as already noted and the fact you don't have many other options for what it brings to the table. Same reason BG3 is breaking the internet/Steam is because there are so few offerings comparable to it in recent years. Starfield feels like something we got before, several times, but in worse packaging. I think it will only be vilified as time goes on like what happen to Dragon Age 2,Superman 64, Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness, Postal 3, and Wonderworld.
I see people praising AC Unity a lot. Mostly in comparison to the new one.
1) that's not being "redeemed" that's just comparisons which doesn't make people like the bad shit more
2) So in order for Starfield to be viewed better Bethesda has to make a much worse game? This is not a great argument of it aging better.
That's always how Bethesda games work though. Now people are praising 4 and 76, in this very thread even.
Even the post above me is praising Oblivion, well accepted to be mid.
>Even the post above me is praising Oblivion
At best the guy was giving the devil his due.
>At least Oblivion did
That alone is him noting that is was mediocre at best. And honestly, back in 2006 people were praising that game, wasn't until about 2010 that people started shittting on it hard.
>wasn't until about 2010 that people started shittting on it hard.
That is what people are missing here, Fallout 3 was fricking defended to hell and back even here around 2008, wasn't until New Vegas announced that it was cool to hate on 3, same with Skyrim, at launch 11/11 that was all the threads here until sometime mid next year and then it was controversial. The fact this game couldn't even hold three months without being shat on everywhere is a sign of how badly this is going to age. Fallout 76 being a live services means they have incentive to fix it but this is just going to be swept under the rug when they move on to ES6
I agree with you but that is what is going on with general perception is they "fixed" what was wrong with their games and as such are being better received.
praising Oblivion
How is "this awful shit did something that shit isn't" seen as praise to you?
I liked Oblivion because at the very least I remember some good sidequests.
Everything after that was about quantity.
Nehrim proved to me that the majority of its problems came down to the dungeons being copypasted levelscaled ass.
his point was that oblivion actually attempted to try something new, starfield did not.
I don't know how I could explain that better, you might actually be too dumb for english.
yeah and when TES 6 comes out suddenly it'll be like
>at least starfield let you romance companions
>at least it had a navigation map
And that would not be seen as praise nor as a reason to play it.
At that point it's the players fault for allowing AAA devs to get lazier and lazier
I know that paid shills exist but I still find it hard to believe that the majority of consumers can tolerate the shit that AAA companies do.
The VAST majority of people play on console so they only have access to AAA games aside from the occasional exception.
Again what do you think praise means?
You are genuinely getting filtered by grade-school English.
Face it, it's the truth. New Bethesda game comes out, people start talking about the old one like it was better.
People HATED Skyrim here when it came out, same with 4.
>People HATED Skyrim here when it came out
You are full on moronic
You weren't even alive when skyrim came out, I however WAS here on Ganker and people were angry about it.
every game is "hated" on Ganker, if you're a brainlet
He's right tho, it was viewed as casualized console trash back then. It also got memed pretty hard with the "You can climb that mountain" and the toddler tier Golden Claw puzzle.
That's confirmation bias like the one anon said and
is spot on, every game is hated but the question is engagement and as already mentioned Skyrim had strong on both ends, much like say BG3, and Cyberpunk got. Starfield isn't getting that and is going the path of Dragon Age 2, Fallout 76 and others where people are spending more time talking about how bad it really is than arguing if it's good.
Skyrim did not have strong both ends back in the day. If you liked Skyrim, Halo, or Ass Creed back in the day, you were considered an idiot.
>tell me you didn't post on Ganker before 2016 without telling me
Halo didn't go sideways her until Reach. Ass creed was like until 3 where they shat the bed hard. Some could argue Revelation dlc people soured due to the writing dip but it wasn't until AC3 that people grew to hate the brand wholly.
>Ass creed was like until 3
It was hated here since 1, newbie. It's a frickin movie game just like the shitty Batman games that could be beaten by mashing 1 button.
Have you played Assassin Creed 1?
Have you? You do a counter and you watch a frickin movie. Might aswell watch them all instead on Youtube free of charge.
That is never how it works, they shit on the older games twice as hard, when 76 was announced people talk about how it couldn't be more dog shit than 4 was, when Starfeild was being talk about people mock how shitty 76 was. People do not look at their older games post oblivion fondly, if anything it seems the older they get the worse they are seen.
neither were you that or you are just building off of memes or confirmation bias. Skyrim could derail threads in 2012 implying for ever hater there were just as many lovers of the game. Starfeild has none of that. Look at this thread even, it's a meta argument of how bad it is and little else. Skyrim didn't hit that shit until around. 2015.
>if anything it seems the older they get the worse they are seen.
That is exactly what happens which is why Starfield is interesting because it's 2 for 2 of a game they released that isn't even enjoyed at launch. Oblivion and Skyrim had big followings and communities, Fallout 4 did too. Starfeild though? Not even two months in and the community is just cratering.
>Skyrim didn't hit that shit until around. 2015
which in irony was Fallout 4 release year
"praise" is to strong a word for what anon was doing. He saying at least as awful as it was they were trying new things, where as a game that came out 17 years later has none of those things.
That's not praise that's just showing this company is regressing backwards.
You are using praise too loosely mate, I don't see anyone praising those games here.
>People have gotten more & more negative towards skyrim & fallout 4 with time
Both were high praised the year they came out. Skyrim was so much flooding Ganker that the summer of 2012 was anons losing their mind how much this place would not stop playing it. You could derail threads just saying you were playing Skyrim.
>People have gotten more & more negative towards skyrim & fallout 4 with time
That's totally false. Both games are well received, and fallout 4 went through a "misunderstood" phase
More like it'll seem less bad by the increasingly lower standards AAA players are forced to deal with
(it's still bad thoughever)
Games are bizarre in this regard. You don’t see people suddenly turning around and praising terrible films. I mean sometimes ironically but nothing like with vidya.
Director's cut vs theatrical cut, the latter are often considered improvements.
>You don’t see people suddenly turning around and praising terrible films
YEs you fricking do
Peak bullshit. This isn't a vidya specific thing
>what are snydergays
Look at Zodiac, critics are now calling it the best movie of the last 20 years
Has that happen with Dragon Age 2? I ask because I feel most don’t go through that unless the marketing was fricking bad like Dante’s Inferno.
I only see people saying it's shit, like forspoken
>Has that happen with Dragon Age 2
that's among the worst games ever made, but I don't think many played it. I wouldn't be surprised if someone calls it an "overlooked masterpiece" and makes 12 hour youtube video in the next few years.
DA2 was extremely bad on the same level as Mass Effect Andromeda. The image I remember that got posted alot was this fricked up hand.
>I wouldn't be surprised if someone calls it an "overlooked masterpiece" and makes 12 hour youtube video in the next few years.
yeah I mean clickbait is gonna clickbait but that is a tall order to actually sell to the viewers
>Starfield is a misunderstood masterpiece
It's all so tiresome
starfield is a piece of timeless art. it was meant to transcend gaming as a whole and we weren't ready. for the next thousands of years historians will look back at the release of starfield and feel ashamed for our whole species
Keep in mind YouTubers have their own tired cliches and bullshit they shovel. Like this month I've seen three videos talking about how Blue Stinger is the ultimate Christmas horror game. There are patterns to this shit.
Cyberpunk had something under all the bugs and glitches, No Man's Sky as a crafting game is still just a crafting game, but there isn't anything THERE in Starfield. It's an empty room
Empty rationalizations. People said the same thing about Cyberpunk, that it was a soulless California GTA clone with no substance to it. What changed is that e celebs started declaring it "redeemed" and then people started looking really hard for something to justify it. And to be fair, there's something to enjoy in most games if you're willing to dig hard enough to find it.
Mark my words, people will be saying the same shit about Starfield later, it's almost predictable at this point. NMS is still dogshit and people are pretending that it's good now.
>videos
In a few years we'll have people on Ganker claim this was a masterpiece, the best Bethesda game, failed because casuals couldn't appreciate it etc: I'd bet my life on it.
>Only took less than a year for Total to be called bad by all the essayists
>took Starfield less than a month
The veil is lifting
not true that clip of dat lil homie floating asleep is pure meme kino
Agreed, and I keep meaning to save it, but I haven’t seen it in awhile. Anyone have it?
Starfield is such a monumental abortion of a game, it MIGHT persuasde Microsoft to not just let Bethesda squeeze out some garbage for TES6.
Not holding out much hope for that, of course.
the ugly black npc that goes floating to the ceiling is pretty legendary
And the one in the club that just pokes her ugly face into view
I don’t think you can disregard an engoodening comeback narrative in a year or two. People got over 76, I think they can be psy-oded into getting over Starfield.
76 had a proper hand crafted map to explore + setting and lore people were interested in
blandfield has nothing
Point is it was a huge PR disaster, but beth held out and peopld came around to it. The point isn’t that the game will actually get any better, but that people will stop focusing on the fact that it’s bad.
+This anon is going to be engoodening Starfield next year
I'm going to be fair and say that despite 76's many, MANY problems it was a live service multiplayer game; content and patches attempting to fix the game were inevitable.
Starfield's intended to be a live service singleplayer game.
We'll have to wait and see what improves, then.
But that's not fair. Let's compare it to games with years of support so we can shit on them even harder for their bland game
>2026: "The engoodening of Starfield"
>74 million views
>41 million likes
Reminds me of that card crusher meme
>Modders don't even want to mod it.
One modder whose mod no one plays having a meltdown does not count.
Bethesda games have a long tail. I suspect people will be playing it for several years and the hate will diminish.
Unless it changes dramatically like FFXIV, it doesn't have that kind of pull
That, and the fact that brown-folk on Ganker cannot stop posting it and talking about. If it sucks so much, just shut the frick up and let it die.
never seen more bizarre racial caricatures as much as this game before
>caricatures
anon... those are photoscanned people
it's the future of humanity sweatie... and it's beautiful
The future is segregated to the point there are still separate genotypes that far out? Based Bethesda
>yellow teeth
>with all the miracle future tech they have
Smoking is still a thing ig
>Modders don't even want to mod it.
this
It's the death knell of any game
Most of them are wrong, though. Not that the game is bad, but that they have no idea why, people are just stupid and think they sound smart so they spread them
It's interesting how vehemently people were defending Starfield for a week or two before the whole internet seemed to take a 180 in opinion on it.
All the more interesting that Cyberpunk, which was lambasted to Hell and back for its mess of a launch, is now in every comparison video of why it's infinitely better. I wonder if the whole thing has lead to another bump in Cyberpunk's sales.
Honestly these people tend to not have opinions of their own and base it all on what e celebrities say, which is why they are able to change from loving to haitng something so fast. Hell they probably wouldn’t even notice the flaws and how bad it is was until someone pointed it out.
If anything this demonstrates why game developers sink so much money into marketing. Most people will just follow whatever the "consensus" is so anything you can do to shift it is critical. Bethesda fumbled this massively, for example, replying to negative reviews only spreads them and encourages more.
For a positive example take BG3. It's solid, but the audience who actually enjoys that kind of crpg is pretty small, yet they got lots of people buying it. I'm sure there are tons of normalgays who normally play madden and shit, who played six hours, stopped playing, but think it must be their fault because everyone else says it's good.
I predict this won't matter much though as long as they keep supporting the game, in three years the situation will be completely different. The only thing that would really worry Bethesda is if a better studio starts competing with them in their niche, but it doesn't seem likely.
People honestly think bg3 and starfield are competing in the same genre because they both have dialogue
Let’s be real, people probably only are giving high praise for BG3 because you can frick anything in it without being seen as a weirdo or a freak like you be if you were playing an actual porn or hentai game.
If anything, CP2077, NMS, Halo Infinite, et al, are all examples why all of this is nit gonna matter. All of this is manufactured and there will come a time when people will move on. They come out with updates, and mods later and somehow we’ll see a “renacimiento” lmao.
I don't know. The overabundance of negative Steam reviews and critical analysis on youtube are probably just striking the iron while the hate train is hot, but it sounds like there's a decent amount of modders already declaring it unsalvageable, which would be a big hit to any form of the game's longevity or turnaround.
Yeah, and the same thing happened to all of the games I mentioned. And wouldn’t you know? They all seem to have a solid fanbase now after being absolute “dogshit” at launch. This won’t even be mentioned in like a year in a half or 2.
I don't see anyone still talking about Halo Infinite, but Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky had a complete overhaul years after the fact. They weren't fixed by modders.
That said, you're right that public opinion could change if Starfield did something similar. But a major rework to their core formula isn't really expected post-launch at this point. Bethesda has just gotten by on its name alone for a long time.
How do you make a drug city so fricking sterile
>but it sounds like there's a decent amount of modders already declaring it unsalvageable
Most of them are people like the skyrim multiplayer modder who are egotists that want the attention but don't realize they're easily replaceable
Modders said the same thing about Skyrim btw
I talked to 4 anons on here who bought collector's editions/pre-ordered it and now vehemently hate it... weird. Better than stubborn denial maybe?
Cyberpunk at its core was still praised for elements of its story and character interactions at launch, even if the bugs and broken console release overshadowed absolutely everything else.
Now that it's mostly fixed, comparisons to the latest modern Sci Fi RPG were inevitable. That said, the Edgerunners anime was probably the best marketing move I've ever seen in reviving the public's interest in a singleplayer game.
it has nothing to do with the game and the world doesn't even look, or act the same
South Americans are strange
>the world doesn't even look, or act the same
There were lots of locales in the anime that were straight out of the game map.
CP2077 is unironically one of my favorite games of all time right up there with Wing Commander 3/4, and I rarely, if ever, experienced the launch bugs except the occasional t-pose. I was thinking about starting another playthrough today, actually.
I wanna replay it soon too.
But I can't decide whether to go mantis blades and sandevistan, or stick with gorilla fists and hacking because I enjoyed that so much the first time around.
Yeah if you had a top end PC (like a 1080Ti or better) Cyberpunk really wasn't that bad at launch.
Obviously needing that kind of hardware for a good experience was a huge issue.
It would run fine at launch but the game was still plagued with a shitton of bugs like npc's randomly T posing and constantly crashing.
I actually didn't see much of that at all when I played at launch.
I think a lot of people would love for Starfield to see the same redemption story as Cyberpunk, being taken from a buggy incomplete mess to something whole and polished.
The crucial difference is that underneath all the issues, Cyberpunk did have some aspects that made it interesting. Even during it's awful release there was discussion to be had about builds, characters, love interests, the endings and so on.
It's not a fair comparison because Starfield has none of that. Even if you fixed many of the technical issues, it's still fundamentally unengaging. The only way Starfield could be redeemed would be for it to be a completely different game.
CP2077 was a Far cry looter shooter with incomplete builds. NOW its just a Far cry with complete builds because the looter shooter aspect was fricking moronic. It was never engaging until the update.
why are you comparing a piece of shit like cyberflop to far cry
>implying far cry ubishit is good
frick off moron.
Because it copies every single fricking gameplay aspect from farcry
how? it's borderline featureless
Even the new builds aren't that interesting. There are probably only one or two perks in each tree that change the game even a little bit, if only to funnel you into the 2-3 intended playstyles.
The hacking tree is absolute dogshit and they made hacking into a supplement to shooting instead of it's own playstyle
Cyberpunk at its worst still had a cool setting. Starfield not at least having alien squaddies or something to set its world-building apart feels like a fumble.
Yes. It just seems like there are humans, cowboys, and the Chinese. It's not really compelling and I think doesn't mesh with space fairing society.
Starfield is the idea of Star Citizen made by the people who wanted to replicate No Man's Sky but with a talent of shoveling horse manure.
Starfield and Cyberpunk's issues are different. If you can't tell the difference in the baseline amount of soul in the games, you are a certified slop enthusiast who'd gulp anything down as long as it has a shiny "CERTIFIED" label on the side.
the vast majority of all people cannot formulate their own opinion on anything using critical thinking and open-mindedness, they will literally agree with and defend indefinitely the first opinion they see from someone they are familiar with
Check bounced also people realized that it was worthless trying to gas this up after the 'magic' ran out and they realized how puddle deep this was. There's only so much lipstick you can put on a pig
2077 is having a No Man's Sky moment where they are for the most part delivering what they claimed they were going too. I'm not sure Todd can do that with Starclown.
NMS still sucks ass though.
no mans sky still looks nothing like the original trailer showed and feels like the most soulless pointless grind
cyberpunk will never program the NPCs to have fun physics and good AI like gta. the world will never feel alive. the engine is a piece of shit, the game feels held together with paper clips and bubble gum
>to have fun physics and good AI like gta.
>GTA having good anything
frick off homosexual
gta IV was groundbreaking with how good its physics were ontop of how the NPCs reacted to being attacked (fighting, running away, being injured, getting back up, not just falling over dead instantly like gtaV) and how good the cop chases were and how NPCs reacted to being hurt all ontop of being open world
gtaV was a huge step backwards making the franchise seem like a shallow piece of garbage
>gta IV was groundbreaking with how good its physics were
this is some next level zoom zoom historical revisionism. There is not a single thing that GTA IV did that other games didnt do before it. GTA 3 was revolutionary, none of the other games after it were.
Yes they did moron, you can't even aim manually in GTA 3 unless you have a sniper. You have to run up to an enemy and target them even with a gun. Even San Andreas made 3 completely obsolete.
yes, GTA IV improves on 3's physics but it didnt actually revolutionize anything, other games were already doing much more interesting things long before it came out. holy frick i hate zoomer so much.
it innovated by having all that going on in a huge open world with tons of cars and NPCs and all kinds of shit you can run over with your car
cyberpunk doesnt have good physics at all which is a big reason why it feels like shit. driving the motorcycles is kinda fun but feels a little on rails and unrealistic in a lot of ways, less realistic and fun than gta IV even. but colissions with objects and people are just shit, melee is shit, enemies are just bullet sponges who dont get injured and limp like NPCs could in gta IV from what ive seen. and just the fact that all the physical objects colission is just so fricking jank and shitty really kills it for me, nothing in the game feels real when you physically interact with it, shit is like clipping through and spazzing out when forces are applied
GOOD MORNING SIRS PLEASE RESPECT THE GRAND AUTO
idk what the deal is with people who hate gta IV
i grew up with GTA 3, never played vice city or san andreas because it felt like the same thing in less relatable settings
i think if you have a good computer and play gta IV maxed out you'll be impressed with how it plays and even with how it looks at times
Cyberpunk had some of the worst physics imaginable. The most notorious one is when you kill someone and their leg would raise in the air like a dog about to piss.
which is the hallmark of a shitty game made by Black folk just trying to cash in on style over substance or exploiting some IPs name or exploiting the good name of their own development team. which is probably all true for cyberpunk
still modern vidya sucks so bad and its one of the very few games that really puts my computer to the test and looks cool so i still got it
GTA 4 physics were god tier. Loved shooting the fat cops and watching them stumble around shooting at the ground.
NMS did not have a "NMS moment", IH made a shitty video where he just said
>yeah so basically after effectively scamming everybody, the game devs decided to add some of the stuff they said they were going to add instead of just closing the studio
>they're basically jesus for living up to some of their promises
2077 is a fun FarCry game but I hate when CDPR fanboys rewrite history and pretend that there was no problems at launch.
I think most agree that it was completely riddled with problems on launch. People just don't care as much as long as there's a final product that they're enjoying now.
>2077 is a fun FarCry game
????
why do you keep posting this, it has nothing in common with far cry
on the surface Starfield is a fine game. I mean it's literally just FO4 in space. It's a looter shooter. The shipbuilding was fun, flying was fun, but once you start looking beyond the surface all the cracks start to show. The dialogue is atroscious, storyline blows, major cities are like kiddy pools when it comes to depth, procedural worlds are all bland and garbage, I could go on.. but pic rel sums up the games feel perfectly.
>Those forehead wrinkles
Dios mio, la creatura...
Apart from the pretty abrupt shift in tone for the last two lines of her dialogue, what's the issue? Nothing stellar, but I've seen worse dialogue trees.
the issue is she says the meme "you didn't trust the science" which was basically a vaxx cope sentence. Also the scientists in game were admitting the microbe wasn't 100% safe and could have repercussions, but she talks as if it was a 100% success rate here. So either a disconnect between writers, lack of testing, or both.
But that's still just a viewpoint given from one character that you're allowed to agree or disagree with.
>one character
All the romantic interests are like this. They are dead set in their beliefs and nothing the player says or does matters. Starfield has less "choices matter" than FO4.
Whether or not the characters in Starfield are well written or interesting, I don't think giving a character convictions that the player can't change is inherently bad.
Unless every character has the exact same set of opinions and moral standards I suppose.
The dialogue and its conclusion essentially says that there's no actual morality in the system, and that the character is uncompromising in their moral/ethical beliefs and nothing you say can change it. The choice is a tug of war between deploying an experimental microbial solution into a planet's biosphere without having a proper understanding of its effects or choosing an alternate option which may take longer but is likely safer. Sarah's position boils down to: "well frick you, pussy. No offense."
All wrapped in a veneer of implied morality of good and bad. There's only one allowed conclusion. Which is shit writing.
i dont remember people defending starfield
i remember a lot of saar posting though
and some autistic moron pretending a modded girl was in the game
>modded girl was in the game
you're a fricking moron dude, that wasnt a mod, it was just what you could make the protagonist look like with the character creator. i know, because i went and found the exact sliders to make mine look like that
ummmmmm source?
https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/655
absolute moron
>It's not a mod dood
>links to nexus mods
Are you stupid?
>the "mod" is literally just an auto save with the character already made for you
>the page literally says character preset
>tells you in great detail how to make it with pictures of the sliders
frick off
It's the same way you add in other mods in the Data Files you bonehead.
the prefix for the file is a safe file, thats not how you mod in things holy frick i know people on this website are bad at ever admitting when they are wrong but you lost dude, you dont know what you are talking about. you cant just mod files into a fricking save file. look at how small that file is. i know zoomers are moronic but you really think you can add custom models with only 921kbs of data?
>prefix
suffix*
Adding that save file would still be considered a modification to the game. Case closed, b***h and gimme 20 dollars.
Nice selfie
Go back to downloading more troony presets from the Nexus, kid.
Post your troon and prove it, b***h.
look at the date you illiterate sandBlack person, this is the preset from the character creator all the way back when the game launched
https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/655
>i dont remember people defending starfield
I saw a fair amount of people getting really angry over the early reviews saying Starfield was disappointing or below average.
There is a worse crime than being a bad game. Starfield is BLAND. Even among its defenders, there is no one who is passionately hooked by it. Its biggest fans think its just alright. CP2077 was fricked at launch and still to this day does not meet the expectation set by their pre-launch marketing, but at least it always had some interesting and well executed aspects despite the flaws. Starfield is just uncannily mediocre, and full of constant frustrating little disappointments. Its like every single aspect of the game, from gameplay loop, to UI, to graphics, animations, AI, exploration, combat, everything is just so half baked and amateurish yet technically serviceable that it just makes the whole experience miserable and dull. You have to have incredibly low standards to unironically enjoy and defend this game because even in the absolutely most favourable light it is merely serviceable.
Ship building's kind of cool.
That's all I got
The painfully ironic part about shipbuilding is that while its a cool system the actual ship is basically pointless in the game. Its not a traversal tool, its a glorified fast travel terminal. there is no space traversal at all. space combat is literally a skippable minigame.
How is space combat skippable? There might not be as much of it as ground combat, but there are several quests that require you to win space battles, including the MQ, and some of them are nasty. By the same logic, on foot combat is a "skippable minigame".
Actually that might be more accurate since the bullshit you can pull with powers and weapon mods can completely trivialize ground combat, while there's no real workaround to break space combat.
>and oooooone more thing, Jackie!
>Modders don't even want to mod it.
I want to mod it, hell I've already made mods for it.
Paid mods though
I still do free stuff for Morrowind
With this, I want to do a lot more with the space portion, starting with adding way more fricking asteroid models because it's ridiculous that there's a whole three possible environments in space.
So since you're part of Todd's inner circle: is Starfield getting a free creation kit?
They already said yes, so
Yes
They're talking about jayserpa and other good modders, sorry train sweetie
But you didn't even like starfield
It's a 7/10, same as Oblivion. There's a base there that's got potential, especially with how much shit they don't take advantage of despite the tech that's really hard to do being there.
At least Oblivion did a few things that hadn't been done a million fricking times before.
>generous physics
>npc schedules
>decent magic system considering the graphical limitations
>decent variety of creatures considering the graphical limitations
>AI was somehow genuinely less moronic
Starfield created nothing, it's recycling the same old gameplay and story elements that everybody has been sick of for 15 years.
The creation kit hasnt been released yet, modders will flock to it then, they love a challenge
Mod developer here
Pay me money and I'll make mods for your shitty game
No thanks
I don't understand how they saw the NPCs doing this lean back creepy death stare & thought "yep, that's good."
They could've kept the old fallout 4 npc animations but they thought this was an improvement somehow.
>I don't understand how they saw the NPCs doing this lean back creepy death stare & thought "yep, that's good."
Must be nice to live in a 100% white or asian area. This is the most accurate portrayal of how black people look in a video game in history. Shame it doesn't also accurately copy behavior.
they hired "diverse" motion actors which were staring like that?
>people look ugly from below
Anon, take a picture of yourself from that perspective right now with your camera. You will look like a creepy homosexual too.
But modders are modding it as we speak...
It's already on the top modded games of all time list in terms of released mods
Thats an ugly jap
Starfield only has 4 companions.
>Modders don't even want to mod it.
It's not like they can even properly mod it yet since the tools aren't released.
Also it's basically guaranteed that they'll add paid mods through the "Creation Club" like they just did with Skyrim.
>Modders don't even want to mod it.
I remember there was an effort to gatekeep the guy behind the Skyrim Unofficial Patch by forming a team of high profile modders to make a more objective bug fix patch. I wonder how long they'll keep it up when the game is objectively a 4/10 at best. I bet they felt instant regret as they booted up Starfield for the first time.
the only cultural footprint elden ring has is the 1-2 hour youtube videos about how a mud texture looks like a face and is actually a nod to the hit sitcom how i met your mother
I won't watch a Starfield analysis unless it's 12 hours
And yet there's always 2+ Starfield threads up at any given time because you dumbasses can't ship the frick up about it.
it's a vidya equivalent of a car crash of a high profile personality
you just can't help but talk about it
Considering there are ten pages here and it’s a major game pass game that is not unexpected
>game has been on Bethesdas whiteboard for probably 20 years
>they constantly fricking talked about it
>finally starts getting developed
>delayed a decade
>resumes development, advertised absolutely everywhere constantly
>usual AAA strategy of spending 99% of the budget on marketing
>Ganker is spammed with it for a year before release
>comes out and it's the videogame equivalent of a ripped whoopie cushion
>morons are surprised when people talk about it
The base of the game is rotten. You know how you can spot when an image has been created by an AI? This game has the same lack of authenticity. It's like they told an AI to make SPACE GAME and just rolled with what came out.
i still think about starfield every now and then. the game is awful but i just want to like it because it has ingredients for a good game. but it's so terrible. like im waiting for a patch to fix it and turn it into a good game. it's pathetic. how could bethesda do this to me.
You might be in luck, the standard operating procedure is to launch the game half baked and finish it later.
Knowing bethesda you'll probably have to buy it again though
I think recent years prove that even if a game has a ton of issues, if the baseline idea and "feeling" is compelling enough it'll still have fans.
A game can come out virtually without issues (which Starfield didn't do either) but if the core feeling and base ideas of the game aren't interesting, nobody will care.
In a few years you'll probably be able to mod decent combat into Starfield. Make it run better. Make extra planets with denser settlements. But unless you make mods that completely alter the game's sterile and vanilla feeling, it won't start being liked. No amount of system tweaks and added features can make up for Starfield being a world you're supposed to WANT to immerse yourself into, but it also being an incredibly boring safe world that feels like a corporate commercial for a clean space station. Until Bethesda puts some grit into the world or story or characters, nothing will change.
I'm having fun with it.
After about 150 hours you'll get bored when you run out of things to see
Doubt I'll play that long, quests, a base, and any boss monsters is all I'm interested in doing.
Ship building's neat
I'll probably just get the best guns & shields, I'm not creative enough for style.
Nobody making sex in space mod? Lame. Guess I'm sticking with Skyrim.
It's incredible to me how much hype this game had and then just sort of disappeared right at launch.
It got mogged by a cyberpunk update and dlc. That's a new level of pathetic for Todd.
Its biggest crime is that it's boring as frick. The story isn't even close to being engaging.
Also the design aesthetic was heavily inspired by boring ass NASA. That didn't help anything.
Don't believe Starfield has had a minimal cultural impact? Name a meme other than the fugly npc stares. Ask yourself, "where is the fan art?" Nobody cares.
It's such a strangely charmless game. It's hard to believe anyone involved was excited about what they were making.
The basic fact is that Bethesda is being pushed out of the industry, because they haven't evolved with the times. There's an actual difference between not changing a core game loop that's locked down tight and universally considered good and having a dated design philosophy. Bethesda and Starfield outlines that the studio is composed of the latter, not the former.
Heap on to that, politically and socially, the country this game released in first, is increasingly become polarized between the uglification of gaming and people wanting to return to a decade or more ago where gaming was about escapism and fantasy rather than pontificating about socioeconomic realities. When you have games like BG3, Witcher 2/3, Genshin Impact, Overwatch, Cyberpunk 2077, released to market which promoted strong and sexy/handsome characters with good looking worlds that delivered on the demands of the player base for a good escapist fantasy; Starfield can't compete with this. The slide has been clear: Oblivion introduced potato characters. Skyrim dialed that up a bit further. Fallout 3 was an ugly game, but serviced by its granted world/lore and nostalgia from Fallout 2 carrying it. Fallout 4 brought a new lighting engine and mods, which is what ultimately saved the game, but the ugliness with Bethesda games continued. Then came Fallout 76, the mother of all trainwrecks and by far the ugliest game Bethesda had ever made. A triplA title that had quality on par with people putting on generic trash games on steam for 3-5 dollar prices and ran just as bad.
And now we have Starfield, which is a culmination of everything wrong in every past release, condensed into one game: its a boring, ugly, runs like shit, uninspired, slop. It is a perfect representation of who Bethesda IS, and though we've had good games in the past, most of Bethesda's releases have been between big transitions in industry with graphics/character design/art where they do well. They can't compete when they have competition.
I didn't play the game but after watching some gameplay I realized it's just Fallout 4 with jump pack gameplay. All those years in development and it's just a reskin of a game they already made.
Don’t worry starfield chads we just need an anime and overpriced mid dlc with another washed up actor and our game will be redeemed
>m-m-m-m-m-modders dont want to make mods!!!!
you mean just the lazy gayot that made/stole the skyrim multiplayer mod then nothing else?
doesn't help that it runs like shit unless you have the upper 1% of hardware
>Starfields lead writer’s responses have all been either defensive or “all writing is subjective and we’ve done nothing wrong, look at all the fans we have!”
Will bethesda ever improve at this point?
Anon we are currently in the era where games come out out early and are shit but in a year or two after several updates people start praising. For a few example No Man's Sky, Cyberpunk 2077, even Bethesda's own Fallout 76 has defenders now. We will only know about Starfields true legacy in about 5 years.
The only support Starfield is going to receive is paid mods.
It took me less than 20 minutes to see the garbage Starfield was on some Youtuber stream when it came out on Steam. The dude playing it said that isn't wasn't that bad. It's like we both were watching the same game at the same fricking time and he thought the game wasn't that bad but I thought I was witnessing the most uninspired slow crap I have ever witnessed in my life. How can this happen?
>huh. huh. huhhhhhhhhhhhhh
>Ganker hated Fallout 4 at release and loves it now
>Ganker hated Cyberpunk 2077 at release and loves it now
>Ganker hated No Man's Sky at release and loves it now
>Ganker hated The Outer Worlds at release and loves it now
You morons are going to be frothing at the mouth praising this game at the end of 2024
The only one of those I see people here actually positive about is Cyberpunk.