That's not what dlc is nor is it required on any other platform. Backward compatibility then a graphic re release, not just "here, same shit, new platform" like fucking 'tendo
Starfield only getting one nomination–and in a category it has no chance of winning–is not at all what I would have expected going into this year.
I don’t know if that speaks to how nuts this year has been for new releases or to how much Starfield fell short, in light of the fact that its player counts on Steam are starting to fall below Skyrim.
To be perfectly fair, Skyrim has a decade of sales and mods in its favor when it comes to Steam numbers, and whether or not Starfield has fallen short by any metric, the things that it does were more novel when Skyrim did a lot of the same stuff 12 years ago.
Starfield player counts will go way up once the modkit is released. Every single one of those people playing Skyrim on Steam have modded it out the wazoo.
They might go up but I’d be surprised it will rival Skyrim. I’m a Skyrim fan, yet I’m not enticed to play Starfield for reasons beyond me. It feels like it’s lacking something and I can’t put my finger on it. I don’t believe mods would make much of a difference, but who knows, maybe I’m wrong.
I modded Skyrim (and Oblivion) because the vanilla game was exciting already, in spite of its flaws. I couldn’t be bothered otherwise.
Depth is what Starfield is lacking, imo. It fixes a lot of what both skyrim and f4 did wrong (there’re backgrounds, they affect your skills, and they come up from time to time, to mention one), but they regressed so hard on other things. They tried new stuff but the delivery was so limp dicked that everything landed awkwardly, or not at all. Think the game suffered because of scope creep, honestly, if they had limited the game to just a handful of planets, they could’ve tailored the experience and they wouldn’t feel so empty.
And as always, their obsession to let you do everything in one playthrough hurt the game hard. There’s very little reason to go for a second playthrough.
Like, they did a good job with most of the game’s mechanics, but everything else is mid as hell. Very forgettable.
For me, it’s the vast expanses of procedurally generated nothingness in Starfield that turns me off the most, especially combined with the menu-based fast travel heavy way you get around.
The magic of Bethesda games comes from their handcrafted open worlds, always full of things to see and explore and get sidetracked by. Its the feeling that kicks in when the horizon first opens up after you exit the sewer/vault/customs office and you realize that you can just pick a direction and start walking and you’ll come across something interesting.
Starfield doesn’t do that. You can’t just pick a direction and go, it’s all fast travel. And if you’re down on a planet you can, but there is no magic to be found because it’s all procedurally generated emptiness between copy-pasted points of interest.
In their ambitions to have a bigger scope than ever they sacrificed the very thing that made their games so compelling to begin with.
And if you’re down on a planet you can, but there is no magic to be found because it’s all procedurally generated emptiness between copy-pasted points of interest.
I think the perfect example of this are the caves that show up sometimes.
First time I found one, I thought “neat, I wonder what’s in there.” So I go exploring and find out that… nothing. Nothing is in there. It’s just an empty cave. So I find a second one, hoping that was a fluke and again… nothing.
The procedurally generated content is severely lacking in a reason for even existing.Nothing is worth exploring in Starfield because there’s just nothing there.
This is exactly my thought. In Skyrim, every tree stump looked like it had the benefit of a beauty pass by an artist. In Starfield, it’s very clear that most of the ground was never looked at before I got there, and there’s no reason for me to look at it now
I don’t think starfield does anything worth giving it an award for. You should give awards to things that do something unique or took a risk. Starfield is a very safe game that didn’t really do anything unique or risky. They just made Skyrim in space.
The space elements were a big part of the marketing. I knew better than to expect atmospheric flight or anything but simple space combat, but intra-system travel being only done in menus and the space sections being put in small lightboxes with planet renderings was rather shocking. That’s 20th-century stuff. It’s especially bizarre given how much of the Bethesda magic has leaned on roads in the past, and there aren’t any roads outside of cities. Even the cargo runs are 100% in menus, without talking to a single person.
Frankly Starfield didn’t even deserve the nomination. It didn’t do anything unique or deserving of merit beyond just existing. I tried it, and while it has some interesting parts it’s just shallow and bland. The lore had huge potential but got Swiss-cheesed by the game mechanics and wasn’t developed at all - in what was supposed to be a Bethesda RPG. They need to yeet Todd and bring back the Obsidian folks.
For the most part, I only play a single (sub-)genre and nothing else. The E3 was a nice event to get up to speed on anything else. I don’t care enough to keep up with all these different presentations and announcements if they are not bundled together. I’ll kinda miss it.
They’re still bundled, it’s just fans doing the work to put them all in one place. The spectacle was cool but E3 was always going to die once the internet became widespread.
Unpopular opinion, but…Good. Remakes need to stop. Hollywood and the gaming community is cashing in on everyone’s low attention span.
We’ve seen it before, we’ve played it before. Give us new shit and stop regurgitating and recycling all the old shit. Let them be what they are- great games of the past.
Depends on the era the game was made. I certainly didn’t want gta triology to be remastered; but I’d absolutely pay AAA price for a Chrono Trigger remaster in 3D.
I literally don't trust Square with it, they would split it into five games and let Tetsuya Nomura write it. They would shit all over the game to make sure it better fit with Radical Dreamers as if anyone gives a shit about that.
Why can’t people make what they want to make, and if you’re not interested, don’t buy it? I understand being frustrated by the lack of new original IP, but that doesn’t mean they can’t both exist.
It’s exhausting listening to the overwhelming negativity some people put out there when no one is hurting them.
i played the originals, there both in my like top 20, and yes would absolutely love to play a remake, just not when that opportunity is given to a company only known for a few remasters (not remakes) /shitty ports, and little to no visible experience building a game from the ground up.
to be blunt Sony asking Aspyr was like asking a 4 star house painter from yelp to restore/remake the sistine chapel.
That’s kinda strange that it doesn’t work on win 10 for you. I haven’t had any problems running it on win 11, which is obviously not the same as 10 but I would imagine the compatibility issues to be very similar.
I tried it last month, I remember playing it without any problems on Win 7, now on win 10 the game started and then crash. Looking for a solution on the Steam forum I saw some people talking about a bug where you get stuck after battles, and the old solution (which was to activate vsync) is not working
Exactly, all I’m saying is that there are people out there that enjoy re-imagining or updating of good content. The numbers don’t lie, and people enjoying something you criticize doesn’t make them stupid.
Both new IP and remakes can co-exist. I agree companies want to take the less risky option, but content creation (both in games and movies) has become more accessible than ever.
Because it’s companies who are making these games not people. They own the rights to make Star Wars games so they can and will. An indie developer can’t make the game they may want to make because they don’t own the rights. I think it’s human nature to get angry at a company that isn’t treating an IP you like with respect.
That being said I totally agree with you though, people definitely take these things so personally. All you have to do is just not buy it. It’s obvious these companies make remakes because people buy them, you then have this weird situation where the community is split between enjoying and hating.
As someone who grew up playing the games, I’d love for them to be remade. Trying to get younger kids to play Starcraft, Runescape, Halo is hard. They are so used to the products of today they can’t get immersed and say it feels dated. I’d love for the current generation to experience these stories with the same investment that I had when I was a kid. And I get to play a different version if I want to. When some companies straight up remove the older version from the internet though, I can see why people get riled up.
Oh it definitely is. I mean we've had many re-releases of a 2600 including multiple Flashback consoles.
AFAIK, only one was moddable to use old catridges, but none shipped with that capability. But many came with a 20+ games and were significantly cheaper.
I still can’t believe they made some of the Flashbacks with IR remotes. My kids grew up in the age of the Switch. They have no idea how to keep a controller within line of sight of the console.
I only played totk and wonder at the moment but I think every entry on the list would be justified to win it. With the amount of great games we had this year, it’s already impressive to be on the list.
Dave the Diver shouldn’t be categorized as an indie game
Dave the Diver is developed by Mintrocket. Mintrocket is not an indie company, it is not acquired by Nexon, it’s actually a sub-brand / division by Nexon. It is a sub-division of a giant company.
There are many indie devs that rely on being nominated to Indie category awards, for exposure, for the ability to stay afloat in business. What Dave the Diver is doing, is to take over a slot that might be the make / break event for smaller indie companies.
Think about the reason why there are specialized bundles for indie games, why people retweet / share info for indie exposure.
If Ubisoft were to spin-off a sub division to make Child of Light, would we have labeled Child of Light as indie (not some weird AAA indie game)?
If ALDI came into United States and spun off smaller mom-and-pop / bodega looking shops to compete with local mom-and-pop stores, do you still consider this spinoff as a local shop that need local support?
If your government creates a grant to fund small local companies, and a giant MNC spun off its brand to compete for the grant, are we even still in this discussion?
Dave the Diver should be competing in other categories, just not in indies.
Also Nexon is scummy kinda like EA of Korea, shutting down games abruptly, fined for loot box exploitations, they have market cap of $17B.
Q. '데이브 더 다이버’가 순수하게 개발로만 흥행한 것인지에 대해 의문이 있다. 한 인디 개발자들은 넥슨이 인디 시장까지 침범하는 것이 맞는가? 하는 목소리도 있다. 그에 대한 짧은 소감을 부탁한다.
Q. There are questions as to whether ‘Dave the Diver’ was a success purely due to development. One indie developer said, “Is it true that Nexon is invading the indie market?” There are also voices saying: Please give your brief thoughts about it.
황재호: 딱 잘라 말하면 우리 게임은 인디 게임이 아니다. 인디는 우리보다 더 적은 리소스에서 더 힘들게 개발하는 개발자들을 존경한다. 해외에서 GJA 인디게임 후보에 올라간 것이 있다. 해외에서 보는 정의가 조금 다른 것 같다. 넥슨의 압도적인 지원을 받는 것과는 다르게, 우리에게 자율권을 준 것이다.
Jaeho Hwang: To put it simply, our game is not an indie game. Indie respects developers who work harder and with fewer resources than we do. There is a GJA indie game candidate from overseas. It seems that the definition seen overseas is a little different. Unlike receiving overwhelming support from Nexon, they gave us autonomy.
While I agree at heart, the term indie sucks for this reason exactly. It fits the definition and most indie games you’d find wouldn’t actually fit the definition.
I Saw A Bear on YouTube recently did a playthrough of the original game and the timing was pretty brutal and some of the situations where you had to jump and turn at the same time and get a very specific hitbox to catch a ledge correctly.
Let’s take the show halo fans have wanted for decades now, bring in a bunch of people who know nothing about the franchise, forbid them from learning about the franchise, and then we’ll market to people who don’t care about the franchise.
Corpo marketing big brains right there. Halo has one of the largest followings in gaming and still that wasn’t enough. Hell the fans would have encouraged others to watch but nooo had to make it bland and generic for non fans. And they didn’t even do that well!
It’s a lot of things, but what I said there was true. They literally forbade the writers from playing any of the games or reading the books. They wanted to “attract a new audience” and “make something new”. So now instead of the TV show all of us fans wanted we have something with master chief and if you squint your eyes it might look like a halo plotline
That’s… a bold decision. Who pays for the rights to a well-known character/IP with lots of fans and then decides they want to attract a new audience instead? Guessing it was pretty poorly received?
gameinformer.com
Top