Microsoft Starfield - Information Thread, update (09/30): "Shattered Space" expansion launch trailer

[Paperclyp]

21 hours ago, Biggie said:

Here is mine

I got it for 20 bucks on the fanatical sale 

[Biggie]

1 hour ago, Paperclyp said:

I got it for 20 bucks on the fanatical sale 

Not bad for some ass

[Brian]

The open critic score for this DLC is 52

[Mr.Vic20]

It’s pretty short. I beat it in under 10 hours. I enjoyed it but it wasn’t 30 dollars good.

[Best]

1 hour ago, Brian said:

The open critic score for this DLC is 52

 

Bethesda is completely stuck in the year 2008. They haven't made any advancements in their games since then. 

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

1 hour ago, Brian said:

The open critic score for this DLC is 52

 

It's gone all the way up to 55!

[Paperclyp]

The influencers are eviscerating this. I think they're being a bit hyperbolic, but I don't think they should be charging 30 bucks for this. 

 

I'm enjoying it but ONE HUNDRED PERCENT there are some extremely valid critiques about it. It somehow feels rushed lol. 

 

However, it slides real nicely into a second play through of the game, and I'm reminded at how much I actually really enjoy the act of combat in this game. If you haven't touched the game since you beat it and want to play this, the other updates they've made in the game kind of make this DLC feel more meaty than it is (even though a lot of those changes are independent of this expansion). 

[XxEvil AshxX]

Remember when DLC was just supplemental shit that was optional and you either cared about it or you didn't? I find the whole argument that Shattered Space was Bethesda's chance to "save" Starfield a pretty bizarre stance. 

 

I mean, if you thought Starfield was okay, and you were hoping Shattered Space was going to up the ante, and were disappointed for whatever reason, that's fair. But if you didn't like Starfield to begin with, expecting a DLC to change your mind on the game as a whole is just weird.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

2 hours ago, XxEvil AshxX said:

Remember when DLC was just supplemental shit that was optional and you either cared about it or you didn't? I find the whole argument that Shattered Space was Bethesda's chance to "save" Starfield a pretty bizarre stance. 

 

I mean, if you thought Starfield was okay, and you were hoping Shattered Space was going to up the ante, and were disappointed for whatever reason, that's fair. But if you didn't like Starfield to begin with, expecting a DLC to change your mind on the game as a whole is just weird.

 

Apparently, there was a notion that Shattered Space would be the equivalent of the Cyberpunk 2077's fantastic Phantom Liberty expansion which I honestly have no idea where that could possibly have come from.

[Paperclyp]

I think it’s mainly people posting stuff for CONTENT and also people are doing a weird thing where they’re looking at active steam numbers and catastrophizing not only Starfield but asmogold was like saying welp this proves elder scrolls is gonna suck. 
 

It’s just the game. Say the most extreme thing cuz that’s what’s gonna get you the most clicks. 
 

If starfield does get “turned around” whatever that means to these people, it’s gonna be over a long period of time with incremental changes, which so far frankly they have been doing pretty well with and they say they’re committed to it. So I’m fairly optimistic. 

[Keyser_Soze]

9 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

people are doing a weird thing where they’re looking at active steam numbers and catastrophizing not only Starfield but asmogold was like saying welp this proves elder scrolls is gonna suck.

 

This type of trolling happens for a lot of games, especially single player ones. You'd see this on Dragon's Dogma 2 discussions a lot as well.

[Paperclyp]

18 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

This type of trolling happens for a lot of games, especially single player ones. You'd see this on Dragon's Dogma 2 discussions a lot as well.

Not to feed generational wars but it seems genuine from a lot of people too, like they genuinely believe hey this single DLC didn’t cause starfield to be the biggest game in the world, therefore Bethesda is cooked. It has to be an exhausting world view. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

2 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

Apparently, there was a notion that Shattered Space would be the equivalent of the Cyberpunk 2077's fantastic Phantom Liberty expansion which I honestly have no idea where that could possibly have come from.

people often like a redemption story and want a dev to be their best selves and make the next big example of what devs can/should do. Like how everyone still uses FFXIV and No Man’s Sky to hope a dev can save a game after a bad launch. But we have seen time and time again of it just jot happening and just becoming abandoned by the dev and publisher. (Like Anthem)

[Keyser_Soze]

I don't know if this game needed "redeeming" I thought it was fine for what it was and enjoyed my time with it. It wasn't a disaster, people just didn't click with it.

[Best]

10 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

I don't know if this game needed "redeeming" I thought it was fine for what it was and enjoyed my time with it. It wasn't a disaster, people just didn't click with it.

 

It wasn't a disaster but extremely disappointing when compared to their other games. It's almost as though they took steps backwards with this instead of improving on their formula. 

[Keyser_Soze]

36 minutes ago, Best said:

It wasn't a disaster but extremely disappointing when compared to their other games. It's almost as though they took steps backwards with this instead of improving on their formula. 

 

it felt like their other games but with better graphics and combat. If anything it was a step forward.

 

They also fixed a lot of gripes people had with the game. The awkward stare you in the eye dialogue which people allegedly liked but turns out they didn't.

They fixed the maps they added a dune buggy so you don't have to run endlessly on a barren planet.

 

I think the only way to be disappointed in this game is if you were expecting something completely different than they had showed. But is seemed like exactly what they showed at their presentations. 🤷‍♀️

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

26 minutes ago, Best said:

 

It wasn't a disaster but extremely disappointing when compared to their other games. It's almost as though they took steps backwards with this instead of improving on their formula. 

I think it felt to many like Bethesda had been making the game in a vacuum, while the industry had long since evolved and improved.  
 

It would be like if Pontiac suddenly appeared touting their new revolutionary electric car that you’ll want to own for 25 years. And it looks like a 2006 honda insight and has a 50 mile range with the interior comforts and features of a 1998 Grand Am.
 

and then they told us we don’t know how hard it is to design and make cars.  

[Best]

23 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

it felt like their other games but with better graphics and combat. If anything it was a step forward.

 

They also fixed a lot of gripes people had with the game. The awkward stare you in the eye dialogue which people allegedly liked but turns out they didn't.

They fixed the maps they added a dune buggy so you don't have to run endlessly on a barren planet.

 

I think the only way to be disappointed in this game is if you were expecting something completely different than they had showed. But is seemed like exactly what they showed at their presentations. 🤷‍♀️

 

It absolutely wasn't like their old games. Every place you go in the game is followed by a load screen. I never once felt immersed in the world because of just how many times a load screen would come up. 

 

Skyrim and Fallout offered enormous worlds that were basically seamless. They should have taken notes on No Man's Sky in how to create a space game. 

[Brian]

Is this dlc part of game pass?

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

1 minute ago, Brian said:

Is this dlc part of game pass?

I don’t think so, because Game Pass was the standard edition. 

[Mr.Vic20]

I would argue that while many elements of Starfield show a clear advancement of BGS development skills, the package as a whole is less satisfying. My personal view is that Starfield is maddeningly close to being a genuinely great game, but its not. Its just a good game. After thinking about why this is, I've decided to use a slightly exaggerated view of Mitt Romney's head.

 

 

 

The total head area is Starfield's potential. But the significantly smaller facial features grouping is its reality. This evokes an empty feeling that is not satisfying, even though it is quite intentional. Add way too many load screens , and a whole lot of procedural generation and you have a game that is less than the sum of its parts. Can all of this be fixed? Mostly, yes. Here is how:

 

* Expand the base quantity of modules the procedural generator has to work with, which will result and a much less "same, same" feeling while exploring POI and dungeons. 

* Continue to release DLC that adds custom locations and additional quest lines. 

* Keep proving new ship parts, weapons, and gear. Players want a sandbox in which to tinker. Let them!

*Expand weapon/gear crafting

* Expand the available random encounter options both on and off world. 

* Provide more opportunities for Dungeons, like having massive random orbital stations that can be taken over by you, and over time, taken by other factions. 

* Allow for more dynamic impacts. Example:  There should be capital size ships and if you down one, it should have % chance of either vaporizing on impact with the planet's surface, making a debris field ,or manage to crash semi intact, which should allow for a new type of dungeon instance.

* Expand on space combat encounter types, they are currently quit limited.

* Bring back outlawed tech! Let's see some mech fights! 

* For the love of all that is holy, increase the volume and brightness of the default flashlight. 

[Best]

It's not apart of gamepass. 

[Best]

@Mr.Vic20 Needs a job at Bethesda. Great post.

[Mr.Vic20]

Just now, Best said:

@Mr.Vic20 Needs a job a Bethesda. Great post.

I got too much damn work as is! 

[Paperclyp]

3 hours ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

people often like a redemption story and want a dev to be their best selves and make the next big example of what devs can/should do. Like how everyone still uses FFXIV and No Man’s Sky to hope a dev can save a game after a bad launch. But we have seen time and time again of it just jot happening and just becoming abandoned by the dev and publisher. (Like Anthem)

I still think a world exists where public opinion on this game turns in a good way - no man’s sky took several years before people stopped shitting on it, and 14 obv was an entirely different beast. 
 

I agree with @Mr.Vic20 in that this is just a good game, which seems like an odd criticism but makes total sense to me. 14’s initial presentation was a shit show, and NMS was borderline false advertising from marketing vs initial product. 
 

So I think if this game’s general perception is gonna change it’s gonna be a very slow burn and be more like 3-6 years down the line a bunch of people writing articles like “actually starfield is extremely underrated” and then maybe gets a boost down the line. 
 

Shit it feels like that happened with fallout 4 now that the show got people chomping at the bit for a fallout game. People had a very similar reaction to fallout 4 at release as they did to starfield, and now it feels like that game is generally all good vibes. 

[Best]

8 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I still think a world exists where public opinion on this game turns in a good way - no man’s sky took several years before people stopped shitting on it, and 14 obv was an entirely different beast. 
 

I agree with @Mr.Vic20 in that this is just a good game, which seems like an odd criticism but makes total sense to me. 14’s initial presentation was a shit show, and NMS was borderline false advertising from marketing vs initial product. 
 

So I think if this game’s general perception is gonna change it’s gonna be a very slow burn and be more like 3-6 years down the line a bunch of people writing articles like “actually starfield is extremely underrated” and then maybe gets a boost down the line. 
 

Shit it feels like that happened with fallout 4 now that the show got people chomping at the bit for a fallout game. People had a very similar reaction to fallout 4 at release as they did to starfield, and now it feels like that game is generally all good vibes. 

 

Is there any possible way through mods on pc to eliminate load times? That's my huge gripe with this game. 

 

I agree with you overall that the community will continue to make this game much better throughout the years. 

[Keyser_Soze]

8 hours ago, Best said:

It absolutely wasn't like their old games. Every place you go in the game is followed by a load screen.

 

If you fast traveled a lot in their previous games you would be hit with a load screen. If you walked everywhere you would see minimal load screens. In this game it just so happens that every place of interest is on another planet that requires a load screen. But if you pick a planet and walk around you won't see any load screens until you transition to an inside area. Going into caves actually is quite fast and sometimes have no loads at all. I agree they should take advantage of the NVME drive but this isn't quite as devastating to me as it is to you because it just feels like their old games to me.

 

I think the problem with the game is that everyone was saying, "I like the old games, I like what we are seeing." And so they made a game like their old games and then by the time it came out everyone said, "wait this is like an old game"