Anyone who wants to downvote or yell at me over this feel free, but whoever buys Starfield on release is an idiot. Why? Because it is a Bethesda open-world game.
Now, I have sunk ludicrous hours into Bethesda games. But, for decades what has held true about Bethesda games is:
Each successive release removes RPG elements, and simplifies plot stuff
They are crazy buggy on release (including reintroducing bugs that were previously seen and identified, I'm looking at you FO4 vertibirds having the same bugs as Skyrim dragons)
Mods are what give them their legs.
Now, debating #1 is not really doable at the moment since Starfield isn't out (but what has been released of the character creation information is thoroughly unimpressive IMO). But, for anyone not expecting this game to be ridiculously buggy on release, I'll just refer you over to Internet Historian's summary of Fallout 76. And for the mods, while Todd has said mod support will exist I still want to see how things break down with creation club vs non-creation club mods, and even if we assume the mod scene ends up looking like the TES and Fallout games that will still take time.
If Starfield turns out to be junk, I'll just pass on it.
If Starfield turns out to be good, I'll give it 6-12 months, pick up the GotY edition with all the DLC (which we all know is coming), and by that point the worst bugs should be patched (either by Bethesda or the Unofficial Patch), the script extended will be out and basic quality of life mods should be there.
But there are no reasons I can see to pre-order it (or pre-order any games TBH) or buy it on release.
That's bugged me about open world games for a very long time. Not that I haven't played them but it seems in a lot of cases it takes away from the game for me for it to be open world. I think in some ways it's better as a linear game, but in one spot instead of a cutscene with a minute to explain how you got on a truck to go from A to B or a limited outside area, they left it open, added some boring things around to do, and a pretty little dotted line to tell you where to go next if you don't want to do the boring things. But they added some very useful items in the boring things so while you can skip them you might not want to.
Every open world game I've enjoyed (especially past 5 years) really left me alone with a lot less guidance. It's boring following a GPS to the next objective.
Anyone who wants to downvote or yell at me over this feel free, but whoever buys Starfield on release is an idiot. Why? Because it is a Bethesda open-world game.
Now, I have sunk ludicrous hours into Bethesda games. But, for decades what has held true about Bethesda games is:
Each successive release removes RPG elements, and simplifies plot stuff
They are crazy buggy on release (including reintroducing bugs that were previously seen and identified, I'm looking at you FO4 vertibirds having the same bugs as Skyrim dragons)
Mods are what give them their legs.
Now, debating #1 is not really doable at the moment since Starfield isn't out (but what has been released of the character creation information is thoroughly unimpressive IMO). But, for anyone not expecting this game to be ridiculously buggy on release, I'll just refer you over to Internet Historian's summary of Fallout 76. And for the mods, while Todd has said mod support will exist I still want to see how things break down with creation club vs non-creation club mods, and even if we assume the mod scene ends up looking like the TES and Fallout games that will still take time.
If Starfield turns out to be junk, I'll just pass on it.
If Starfield turns out to be good, I'll give it 6-12 months, pick up the GotY edition with all the DLC (which we all know is coming), and by that point the worst bugs should be patched (either by Bethesda or the Unofficial Patch), the script extended will be out and basic quality of life mods should be there.
But there are no reasons I can see to pre-order it (or pre-order any games TBH) or buy it on release.
That's bugged me about open world games for a very long time. Not that I haven't played them but it seems in a lot of cases it takes away from the game for me for it to be open world. I think in some ways it's better as a linear game, but in one spot instead of a cutscene with a minute to explain how you got on a truck to go from A to B or a limited outside area, they left it open, added some boring things around to do, and a pretty little dotted line to tell you where to go next if you don't want to do the boring things. But they added some very useful items in the boring things so while you can skip them you might not want to.
Every open world game I've enjoyed (especially past 5 years) really left me alone with a lot less guidance. It's boring following a GPS to the next objective.