i love how the argument is neil armstrong wasn’t bored, like somehow the experience of being the only person to ever set foot on a non-terrestrial body is of the same caliber as holding a joystick up to see more pixels of a computer generated scene of nothing

They could have easily expanded the ship builder to a land rover that you cam fully customize.

Yeah but if they added vehicle travel it wouldn’t take as much time to get around and Bethesda couldn’t brag about how many hours players have spent in game

Thankfully they are adding vehicles, you can see them working on it on some footage. Currently I still like Starfield, I see the criticism and agree with it but I guess I’m not as picky when it comes to some of this stuff

Terraria did it better

see that mojang not every damn animal add need to be f*cking realistic

Pretty silly how because the game is so empty I felt like I had to turn on console commands to increase my movement speed value to traverse a planet. Not like I ruined my save file doing that though, I ran into a bug earlier in the game where my ship just disappeared from the dock and had to use a teleport command to continue playing, that ruined my save file lol

Starfield didn’t choose realism either…

Todd must think that watching paint dry at his house is the most rivetting experience of his life

Man it is funny that they really thought this game was gonna be a game changer lmao. Hell they even had me fooled.

This game looks so bad lmfao

Starlink battle for atlas. Exploreing entire planets, gamified adventure where you never leave the ship.

It reminds me of those Mass Effect missions where you drive around those boring planets in a big piece of crap.
Except you’re walking across them in Starfield.

I’ve said this to this point the first time. Imagine if he said this to Skyrim and replaced most of the caves/mountains/ruins with empty spaces?

Its a lazy reply to a weakness they made. Todd “Quality” Howard at it again.

The vastness of space randomizes when you fly point to point? 😂

Can we poop? nope? Not realistic then, so let’s go back to the fun part shall we?

mm people rather play no man’s sky than this slop

Video games are supposed to allow us to experience what we can’t experience in real life. If your game is gonna copy real life then I don’t want it.

The vast planets are not inherently the problem, but the available modes of movement are. Its just slow walking and some hopping with a jetpack. Other space games offer much faster traversal (ships, vehicles), making large landscapes fun.

It’s boring unless your a space nerd like me

I don’t think they did it for realism. More like a lack of talent and imagination

No Mans Sky fans laugh their asses of

For a moment I was wondering if he understood the serious technical limitations that made it impossible to fly around like that

I honestly prefer big open spaces, especially if one can build stuff.

Realism isn’t bad, just a lot of players whom are lazy that won’t walk 100 meters ingame instead of fast traveling if possible.

Players: “Add vehicles!”
Bethesda’s engine thats just been renamed over the past decade and held together with duct tape: *sweating profusely*

Space Engineers infinitely better for space exploration

If you want to do a realstic space game where everything is vast but really emtpy. You can make up for it with a ton of immersion if you do it right. But starfield definitely doesnt do that either.

Huh… No man’s sky did it better 😅

forget planetary flight
a freakin rover would have been enough

SIXTEEN TIMES THE ROCKS 😂

What’s worse is that we know what Todd thought, he said it would be fun because the Moon is barren but we dream of walking on it. Todd fails to realise that when you’re hungry you don’t get full from ordering a burger in GTA.

Space isnt real and the earth is FLAT. NEXT!

It’s not even realistic though that’s the thing

I would love to travel here on a dirt bike

“Space is big and empty”

Incorrect. Literally everything is in space.

This isn’t where you put realism in a game. You make a game realistic by having functional weapons, even if they are futuristic, there is no excuse for round bullets coming out of square barrels, Bethesda! You make a game realistic by having realistic damage. You make a game realistic by having a UI that doesn’t take you completely out of the game every time you need to access your inventory. You make tactics count, you make scouting, stealth, and long range engagements worthwhile. There is so many other ways to make a game “realistic” that Bethesda completely ignored, yet they decided that walking for kilometers on a barren planet was “realistic”? You have a massive spaceship and you want me to believe that there is no surface vehicle on board? That is unrealistic.

You know what you do? Don’t add in empty planets and places to go to. Nobody would go to barren rocks to look about. Why give the player to choice of boredom?

Todd is the type of guy that would say his bad game is good because not everybody is supposed to like it.

Bethesda wanted to make a realistic experience and forgot that games are supposed to be enjoyable.

No mans sky made it fun. Starfield sucks

Fun fact: real life sucks! That’s why we play video games

They should add overshields. Every space game has them (Halo, Mass Effect, Destiny). I actually really like Space Field but it feels less futuristic than fallout. They need more Lazer weapons to. As for space powers I wish instead of going Skyrim shout they actually made a magic system. I would rather have Quick bars spells than 6-9 guns. I would have one line for healing items & Melee, one for grenades, one for guns & one for powers.

That’s the Bethesda charm 😅

How about meaningful content? Mass Effect 1 had empty landing spots on planets, but finding wrecked ships or graves gave away a small detail of a historic event, but had to find more like a piece of a puzzle to learn the whole story. That’s how you make boring stuff not boring!
Bethesda used to do this in Oblivion for example, but they were too lazy to do the same in Starfield.

If there was no loading screens, you could freely fly to planets (no man’s sky style) and they actually had varying terrain this game would be game of the year. I would love nothing more than to fly to a city on a planet, and then be able to fly north to an ice cap, and there was no rocks, no nothing, just flat ice as far as the eye could see.

it’s also why even though i think they look cool, i don’t think bethesda should ever attempt to make their cities like those Unreal Engine concepts, you know the various “the real scale of so-and-so city” where it’s just a massively bloated version of a city which yea, might be realistic, but it would be dispersive, repetitive and not fun. Bethesda “Cities” mightbe small but they are always packed with content in every corner you look and they’re always iconic.

They should not have made Starfield yet if they knew they didn’t have the capabilities to allow us to fly our ships around planets. Loading screen flight is pathetic.

I actually understand what Todd was saying about this type of game design. But a lot of people don’t really like that type of design. It is why it needs to be more filled than just emptiness. But that would actually take up quite a bit of gb on the disk or to download.

Yeah, thats why Starfield failed, because it is not fun, loading screens and barren planets is literaly 80% of the game

Youtube is serving me back to back shorts about rocks!

“16 times the loading screens”

At this point just fuck Bethesda bro. Just archaic and tone deaf as hell.

I honestly think the “realism” part was an excuse to slap an easy procedural generation system to fill out the gameplay.

It would be very realistic to have a lot more happening on the planets during a time when it’s fairly common to have space ships though

Space isn’t all empty as there are many habitable planets but even in starfield those are lakcing

Hell, even rovers would have been HUGE. I got tired of running open expanses of nothing just to find some procedurally generated space bandit camp. At least vehicles would get you to the better bits.

Games like mass effect even gave us vehicles for planets that had a quarter of the exploration area.

Reminds me of outer worlds. I used to despise the fact that there were a handful of planets with just a segment of explorable planet for me. After playing starfield I was surprised at how much more I liked how outer worlds did it.

It boggles mind that they didn’t think about this stuff .

A dune buggy would do wonders.

Yeah technology isn’t at a point where you can travel to hundreds of planets and fly your ship around them to explore all while having something to do to keep you entertained like mining resources. Right No Mans’s Sky? Oh wait.

Ain’t gonna lie. I defended the game forever… I’ve now not played it in 5 months and prefer their games from 10+ years ago 😂

Nms did a damn good job

How do you not put vehicles in this..?

Killer Todd Howard impression “16 times the rocks”

Realism? You mean the same kind of realism that makes you take damage from inhaling toxic fumes WHILE WEARING A LITERAL SPACE SUIT?