Starfield steam page for the DLC currently shows eight user review score of 41%, making this one of the worst Bethesda DLC's released of all time. This is so horribly, shockingly bad for Bethesda, because it shows as a gaming company, they are no longer capable of delivering a really good gaming experience as they had in the past. Some of the reviews sum up quite nicely what is wrong with this DLC....

Less content than any skyrim DLC. Less than The Fallout 4 story DLCs. Doesn't change of the complaints people had with the base game, writing is still at a 4th grade level.

Quick: If you are looking to buy my answer is no, you aren't missing much content. I was really hoping to enjoy this DLC. Took about 4 hours for the main story and maybe 2 more hours to 100% the achievements.

These two reviews I think really summed up what Starfield has become, $70 for an AAAA title that has extremely little buy-in from the community, horrifically low amount of replayability and can be breezed through easily. It's mind-boggling to see this

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] HeavyRaptor@lemmy.zip 26 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The difference is, there is no fixing Starfield, it is rotten to the core. You would have to re-do most of the story elements and writing, and the disjointed, empty world. On top of that you'd have to fix the bugs and technical limitations like the constant loading screens. At this point you would be throwing out most of the game and basically starting from scratch with a few systems done, like the ship building and possibly gunplay.

I think cyberpunk never became what many wanted, but if you let go of your expectations, it is a good game.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Funny thing is that shipbuilding also felt annoying to me. There were so many arbitrary restrictions that I felt like I couldn't actually make the ship I wanted, it always felt the same

[–] Jarmer 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That's exactly how I felt too. I tried SO MANY times to build the ship I wanted. Never could get it done. I even console-command-cheated vendor stock to allow myself access to every part at my home base, and even STILL THEN I could never get it the way I wanted it. It was important to me for role-playing purposes for every crew member on board to have their own bed, and a good kitchen, living space, bathrooms, etc... Stuff that just makes sense for a spaceship that is essentially a flying house. But so many times I could never get the damn ship builder to do what I wanted. I'd change some random part, and then BAM some of my beds would disappear for no reason? Ok well now two of my crew members have nowhere to sleep. wtf.

Just wound up abandoning my entire build and going back to the same ol ship I'd been using the whole game.

spoiler

It's also absolutely bizarre to me that the end-game ship, the one I had been looking forward to for SO LONG is just completely and totally 100% empty. When I had my crew members on board, they just stood still in place and stared at the wall. What the hell is going on here!??!?!?! That really ruined the entire ship for me. Could never get over that.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 2 points 1 month ago

Fully agree with you for that last bit (and the rest but especially your spoiler). Such a waste.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I dislike the narrative that something is "unfixable", everything is fixable if there is a will to do so.

I don't know why game developers seem to have inhibitions of changing the game too much after release. For instance reworking and extending the main story in a game seems to be a big red line for them.

For instance I would have wished in Cyberpunk 2077 to actually play Vs introduction into Night City and the individual fixers myself, instead of just watching a cut scene. A DLC could have extended the start of the game a bit.

The same for Starfield, they could extend and improve the main story, characters and locations in an update, but seem hesitant to do so. Something like directors cut, that adds cut content as well as tons of side quests into the game.

If people still want to play the original game, they can make the extended story optional, like sleecting what version you want to play at the game start.

For bugs, they could work together with the community and the "unofficial patch" and engine fixer modders, instead just ignoring them. In Skyrim SSE for instance they still had many of the same bugs that Oldrim had and where fixed by thr community.

Bethesda could improve, and even fix their games, if they would decide to do so. Their DLC just doesn't seem to be worth what they ask for, it could have been just part of a free update, so that some more people buy the base game.

[–] HeavyRaptor@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 month ago

I just ment you'd have to cut so much that at that point it would basically be a new game. I'm thinking a bit more from the dev point of view. Like an old rusted-to-hell car, everything is fixable. The question is cost: if you have to replace or re-fabricate every piece than you're better off starting from scratch.

I'm the case of Starfield, changing the core story, characters, missions, and theme is basically the same as replacing the entire car body.

[–] drunkosaurus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago

they could extend and improve the main story

I don't think they can.

I have a strong suspicion that truly talented writers who are able to build memorable stories in great worlds are few and far between, and those that are willing to work in the games industry of today are as rare as hen's teeth. Most companies, including Bethesda, simply don't have the talent at hand to fix their mess, or there wouldn't be a mess in the first place. The truth is probably somewhere between this, and the ol' "eh, good enough".