With less than three weeks left of Starfields release, I thought I’d give my own personal take on what might come of it.

I’m a huge space nerd. Love Space games, and love it in real life. KSP is one of my favorite games. No Mans Sky was what I dreamed of, and then on release…it was a mess. Tried to get into it now, and I WANT to like it. It’s clearly had effort put into it. But the core problems are still there. The main one being: Procedural generation.

No Mans Sky feels like a mile wide and an inch deep even now. The planets lack variety. It’s pretty much a single biome across the entire system. The outposts look almost the same. Landmarks are the same. Creatures are the same. It makes no sense. Of course, that’s due to the procedural generation. And it shows. I could go on about how the story and side quests are uninteresting and frankly, lazy. But that’s besides the point. Even if it’s a core issue. I would rather have two or three massive, full scale solar systems with a couple of planets that are hand crafted and have a TON of work done to them. With, you know, actual biomes and some dead ones sprinkled in.

Thing is, Bethesda has been experimenting with radial quests and procedural generation for over a decade now. They have shown they care about detail and substance. They know what players look for. They’re not gonna implement a half baked system and do what NMS did. Because we all know how that turned out. And to me, it sounds like they clearly believe this system is ready now. After all, while the radial quests in Skyrim were not perfect, (Dark Brotherhood Forever), they were pretty good in moderation. And that was on 7th gen hardware. In any case, we’re still getting a full scale solar system (or at least a couple?) that are in fact, hand crafted. It’s exciting to say the least.

So while I don’t think Starfield is going to change the industry, and I fully expect bugs, I do think this is going to be the best example of procedural generation going forward and what it CAN do for future titles. Whether from Bethesda, or other developers. The main thing here I’d like to point out is that Bethesda isn’t looking at procedural generation as a core mechanic. They see it as a TOOL. And that’s what it should be across the board. I fully expect players to not go full on exploring towards other star systems until late in the game which will take a bit. Hand crafted is still the most important aspect as it should be. But if done right, I believe it could serve well for replayability for years to come.

People give a lot of shit to BGS for Fallout 76. But remember this. The game was fixed. And every game before it has been acclaimed. Fallout 4 was a bit disappointing for most and I agree, but I do think the mods made up for it and the combat was a big step up versus Fallout 3. It was the weakest title, for a BGS game. Sure. But even then, it was VERY good compared to what was out at the time. They obviously still know what they’re doing unlike other developers now.

  • sciawp@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think what it comes down to is how much you enjoy the freedom of the games. A lot of their games kinda just let you loose with a story that you can build over the course of the game, whereas New Vegas has a goal in mind that it is constantly pushing you towards.

    Again, I don’t think either preference is better than the other. I just think they are two very different play styles that are suited for different experiences.

    • Graphine@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, that’s me. I don’t like being pushed towards a goal. I want to explore and let myself breathe. What I feel Bethesda is good at is the tutorial.

      They tell you, “Hey so here’s the story. This is the game. Alright now go do what you want, up to you.”

      I love that. I don’t feel pushed to perform a specific task. New Vegas definitely felt that way for a long time during my playthrough.