why would they change, they just got themselves a braindead army of fanatics after becoming first party,
Souls games took the crown from them IMO.
This shit sounds like a design doc for Starfield that never made it.
I think some people prefer more organic exploration. Just walk out into the world and stumble upon interesting landmarks, random events etc. Menu hopping takes away from that
All of those games are great. But none of them have people playing their one play through for hundreds of hours past the end game. I live the souls games and have yet to start Elden ring or sekiro though they await me in my backlog….. and have been pushed back even further by armoured core, now!…… but those are one-and-done games. Unless you enjoy replaying games. I don't…. Limited time and too many games…. Never mind too many things to do besides play games let alone play a 60 hour game twice, where I revisit a lot of things I already done. Atleast with Bethesda RPGs there is always end game stuff and mods to keep things interesting for years after release. Few other devs can say they have a single player game that's bent played by as many active users as say, Skyrim all fallout a decade plus after release. Takes a lot of game in your game to keep a player interested for that long…. Give ceasar his due. Bethesda games are good at what they do and nobody really does it better. Only GTA 5 has been played as long as Skyrim or fall out. Anything else where people have logged more hours is a full on MMO, not a single player RPG.
I agree. Imagine if this game had space exploration to the point of just traveling from point A to B and you come across a old space station and try to loot it only to find people are in a deep sleep and went off course to find a new world, now your choice is to either wake up the captain and tell them they are off course and its not 2007 anymore or loot the ship and allow them to go to their doom lol. So much has been left on the table based on how this game was sadly designed.
We must play ES games differently then, I restart ES games with new builds all the time, same with Souls games.
You are forgetting Witcher 3 pal. It has had higher active users than Bethesda games for years now
Different strokes for different folks! And with the DS games they are so challenging the first time round I dare not put myself through it a second time. I can understand replaying to get a different class but that ain't worth a whole other 60 hour playthrough. The experience won't be as fresh as the first time and you have to do the frustrating parts all over again….. and then there are just so many games to play and so little time. I don't want to waste time playing the same 60 hour game twice. I just move on to something new. Unless the game has new experiences to offer after the end game.
Yes. I love that game too, now that you mention it…. My bad for forgetting that one! What makes these RPGs worth playing past the end game is the worlds too. But as I mentioned in a previous post there always comes a time to say goodbye. And the next game and the next adventure awaits!
So what you described is that it's there in segmented pockets rather than being open and seamless.
That's where these types of games excel. New challenges, and new perks make the next run through different from the first.
If not more.
Is it really time wasted when it is time you enjoyed playing? I replay games all the time and those games that I do replay, I am certain that I'll have more fun doing it rather than some other mediocre game I have no idea of what I'm getting. Besides in the specific case you pointed out, difficulty does change things up a bit especially in the early game on NG+ Elden Ring. The latter portion being a bit more of a marginal upgrade. The game doesn't stop being enjoyable just because you finished it especially in games where gameplay is at the forefront. I would agree with you if a game is more story heavy and only if the gameplay itself isn't much of a draw.
I dont get why people being so against replaying games, If enjoyed the game I fucking love replaying them.
.
He also thought D4 is good so...
200 hours? By reading impressions I doubt it has content worthy of 200 hours
I would hardly call that a content. Building outposts on a lifeless generated planets? I'm not sure what's the point in that especially that there's no MP component but I guess everyone understands fun and quality content differently. I personally would have to be well compensated to do that.
Holy hell this is a bad take.
I might give it another go just not for a premium they are asking, it's just first impressions very pretty poor to me.Outposts can bring in credits and extract minerals and do other things while you play missions. If building that stuff isn't for you then fine, but just because it isn't content you would enjoy doesn't mean it isn't content. It is. But put that outside and you've still missions galore that are going to stack up a ridiculous number of hours.
But if the game isn't for you then it isn't for you. Probably would be best do try Baldur's Gate 3 like you said.
Here's the OT:
Generic royalty free metal?That song choice.
Skyrim works seamlessly. We all thought the bigger playing area would mean access to vehicles, light speed travel directly from the ship control etc. But instead it's meant scrolling through menus to select locations
How much of Starfield's explorable areas are seamless like Skyrim's? It's not just explorable areas, it's areas you explore without meeting a loading screen. All the areas in the world don't mean anything if you have to constantly load them in and break immersion.
Actually, you can just travel from wherever without using menus. The game doesn't explain this for some reason.
