Its no more than a 5/10 for me. The game simply doesnt deserve the hype. Instead of fallout 4 x 1000 , its more like fallout 4 over a few planets, all of which are incredibly boring to look at, and the fact missions are on other planets is more annoying than amazing. The game talks about exploring, but gives you little to explore, you cant ride a dirt bike in some alien mountain, or gaze upon incredible vistas, or find some secret hidden away. Visually , and thematically its less interesting than the fallout series, which at least had kooky appeal. The main story is fine, but the last mission is a big jump in difficulty with little to no payoff except newgame+ (with the loss of every item youve collected). I encountered a few bugs , the enemy AI is plain awful, the crafting is dull, the ship builder was ok but nothing to get excited about since the module/weapons list is limited. In my view, bg3 destroys starfield on every level and its a shame because the potential for a great game is there, theres just not enough variety, theres nothing truly alien or wondrous, not enough exploration. 5/10 from me, do better Bethesda
Could just be that the game isnt very good. Having just completed it , i would say it deserves no more than 5/10. It was billed as Fallout 4 x 1000 planets, buts its more like F4 spread over 20 planets, with the planet hopping being more annoying than amazing. The planets themselves are more boring than NMS v1.0, for a game that bangs on about exploration theres barely any exploring to do. The AI is terrible, & the last mission is an exponential leap in difficulty. Main story is ok and id still recommend people to play it, but overall a huge disappointment.
Comments 2
Re: Poll: Based On What You've Played So Far, What Score Would You Give Starfield?
Its no more than a 5/10 for me. The game simply doesnt deserve the hype. Instead of fallout 4 x 1000 , its more like fallout 4 over a few planets, all of which are incredibly boring to look at, and the fact missions are on other planets is more annoying than amazing. The game talks about exploring, but gives you little to explore, you cant ride a dirt bike in some alien mountain, or gaze upon incredible vistas, or find some secret hidden away. Visually , and thematically its less interesting than the fallout series, which at least had kooky appeal. The main story is fine, but the last mission is a big jump in difficulty with little to no payoff except newgame+ (with the loss of every item youve collected). I encountered a few bugs , the enemy AI is plain awful, the crafting is dull, the ship builder was ok but nothing to get excited about since the module/weapons list is limited. In my view, bg3 destroys starfield on every level and its a shame because the potential for a great game is there, theres just not enough variety, theres nothing truly alien or wondrous, not enough exploration. 5/10 from me, do better Bethesda
Re: Oh Look, Starfield Is Getting Review Bombed On Metacritic
Could just be that the game isnt very good. Having just completed it , i would say it deserves no more than 5/10. It was billed as Fallout 4 x 1000 planets, buts its more like F4 spread over 20 planets, with the planet hopping being more annoying than amazing. The planets themselves are more boring than NMS v1.0, for a game that bangs on about exploration theres barely any exploring to do. The AI is terrible, & the last mission is an exponential leap in difficulty. Main story is ok and id still recommend people to play it, but overall a huge disappointment.