• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Starfield has 'Mixed' reviews on Steam (Up: 'Recent' reviews are Mostly Negative)

ShaiKhulud1989

Gold Member
4qC3pAI.png
It rapidly peaked at 310k+ in arguably the best time of the first weekend and dropped sub-300 in less than an hour. With 1.5% of user score along with it. Starfield opening hours are literally scaring away the audience and I do have a feeling that the legs of the game will be even shorter than those of Halo Infinite (and that was f2p release with 250k+ peak online on Steam).

My guess, 350k CCU is the most positive number that Bethesda can hope for and for the game of scope, ambition, PR budget and pedegree of Bethesda this is frankly a slight public humiliation. Especially given that PC was always the biggest platform for Howard's games. Even Fallout 4 with it's mixed release reception from users peaked at 100k+ more. And no, I don't see Gamepass as a spoiler here. It's a dreadful experience on PC and you cant' use even the basic mods with GP build of Starfield.
 

ANDS

Banned
The entire Neon segment just shows how many lightyears ahead CDPR was in terms of visuals, animations, dialogue, cutscenes, immersion. And that game came out three years ago.

With how much "hype" NEON was getting, when I got there and saw that the "city" was literally a single street with shops encircling it. . .like, I can give them credit for New Atlantis, and I can see what they were going for with Akila City, but other than art aesthetic, NEON is one of the laziest designs I've seen in a Bethesda game by far (and this is from someone who enjoys immensely FO4). The city is hopelessly hyped up in all the conversations you have with people leading up to it, and when you get there, it is such a massive letdown. . .much like everything else in the game.

. . .I know this post was about CP77 (now there's a city), but I first went to TW3 and ANY of its little hamlets and burgs and how, even over large swathes of empty space, they were still able to build and add character to their world, even for areas that are just set-dressing. When you get to the ASTROLOUNGE and it's literally just a lame dance floor and the weirdest thing, in the only place the most notorious narcotic in the Settled Systems is legal for consumption, is some dancers. . .as the kids say, "I just can't with you."

EDIT: As for this thread, we've seen the ceiling for SF. I don't doubt GP has blunted some of that shine, but given the absolute hype surrounding this game, that it's barely striking above SKYRIM and well short of FO4 (no idea why that game is ignored in the article about 300K CCU) is not a good sign. Hell, it hasn't even been able to best BG3 a single day since release.
 
Last edited:

DrFigs

Member
It rapidly peaked at 310k+ in arguably the best time of the first weekend and dropped sub-300 in less than an hour. With 1.5% of user score along with it. Starfield opening hours are literally scaring away the audience and I do have a feeling that the legs of the game will be even shorter than those of Halo Infinite (and that was f2p release with 250k+ peak online on Steam).

My guess, 350k CCU is the most positive number that Bethesda can hope for and for the game of scope, ambition, PR budget and pedegree of Bethesda this is frankly a slight public humiliation. Especially given that PC was always the biggest platform for Howard's games. Even Fallout 4 with it's mixed release reception from users peaked at 100k+ more. And no, I don't see Gamepass as a spoiler here. It's a dreadful experience on PC and you cant' use even the basic mods with GP build of Starfield.
Gamepass is clearly a limiting factor though. I'm not sure how you can discount it. Lots of people are not playing this game on steam because it's cheaper to pay 15 dollars for a month or whatever.
 

ShaiKhulud1989

Gold Member
Gamepass is clearly a limiting factor though. I'm not sure how you can discount it. Lots of people are not playing this game on steam because it's cheaper to pay 15 dollars for a month or whatever.
I’m not discounting it, just saying it’s not a huge spoiler. PC gamepass experience is very clunky and you can refund the game in Steam anyway, so it’s easier to give it a whirl via Steam regardless. Then there’s also the early access and spike in steam refunds too that didn’t helped the game either.
 

StereoVsn

Gold Member
IMO, MS really should go Sony route for their big games. Give it at least 6 months to a year before releasing on GamePass.

That said, who knows, Phil and Co have the numbers, but then again they have the support of one of the largest Corpos in the world.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
$11 for one month of Ultimate plus a month free for initially having auto billing on. So $11 for two months of Starfield access on XCloud. No MS hardware or Windows required. Works for me, but not really a win for MS.
When you're an almost $3T company, you can try and "loss lead" the industry in a disruption race to bottom. Netflix did it for well over a decade (on the backs of investors in their situation).

Disney tried for a short bit, but backed out fast.
 
Honestly, I think it is too soon to draw conclusions on how well the game is doing, we'll have to wait until next month to see more concrete information.
If there is a big boost on Xbox Series consoles or the game is making it to the top of the sales charts I guess that's good enough of a result for Microsoft. Or better yet, if MS themselves give an update on the growth of GP after Starfield's release or if they somehow release the millions of copies sold then we can be sure they feel good about the results.
 

Hugare

Member
When you're an almost $3T company, you can try and "loss lead" the industry in a disruption race to bottom. Netflix did it for well over a decade (on the backs of investors in their situation).

Disney tried for a short bit, but backed out fast.
Movies/tv shows are so much cheaper than games, tho (mostly)

Bethesda is making TES VI next and I doubt that MS would change it in any way, but if Starfield wasnt being made before the acquisition, I doubt that MS would have greenlit it as it is today.

A big open world singleplayer game with no microtransactions at all. It doesnt make sense financially in Game pass. They just delivered it day one on GP because it was already what, 80% done when MS bought Bethesda?

Halo became GAAS, Forza became GAAS ... I can garantee you that TES VI will have some form of microtransactions in it.

EviLore EviLore is right: for the customer its an amazing deal. But I'm curious to see for how long MS can hold this kind of deal.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
For those of you above talking cloud, loss leading, game pass etc.... I say just take any deal you can get and consider it a win and an option. Who gives a shit if a company makes or loses money. Will it last forever? Probably not. Not many things do. I dont care if a store or supplier loses money on a front page Black Friday or 99 cent blowout deal, why do I care if a game company's financials? The company I work for loses money on some stuff too. I dont think anyone gives a shit if some dirt cheap floor cleaner or soap needing to be dumped goes for a loss sometimes, so who really cares. I just care about getting a good deal and let the bean counters worry about it.

I think of all this dirt cheap GP (I subbed for two 3 year terms for $1 and 1 month extra fees over my $60/yr Costco Canada gold) so like when a bunch of us older people did Columbia House CDs in the 90s. It was nuts. CDs were $20 CDN at the time, but if you do those promo plans with CH, you'd get 8 or 9 free CDs and all you had to do is buy 5 regular priced CDs for maybe $30. So $150 for like 14 CDs. I'll take it. I can totally find 14 good CDs among the 100s in the booklet. Then after that the deal it turned into Buy 3, get 5 or something. I forget. At some point if the content isnt there (I ran out of CDs to get) and more importantly CDs at stores started getting cheaper to $10-15, it doesn't make sense to do it. So I quit after a handful of years.

But during that time, I scored a deal. Doesn't sound like much now saving a couple hundred bucks, but worth it as a student.
 

TrueGrime

Member
The game is good. However, I think that playing through the story and faction missions become fairly stale after a while. That led me to try some of the other gameplay loops, such as ship building and outpost building.

Ship building is good in concept, but there really needs to be more explanation on what parts fit together and why. I found myself being restricted way too often in the early game. Now that I've put some points into piloting and such I can purchase better parts, essentially upgrading the class of my ship. I do like the freedom though. A ship of any shape can be viable long as you meet certain criteria.

While Outpost building does a better job, connecting outposts is unintuitive to the point that I think it might actually be bugged. This could also use better explanation. This is typical for Bethesda games, but it's even more vague in Starfield.

Overall, for Bethesda, this game is a huge improvement over previous games. Lighting, interior design and main character human character models are much improved over anything we've seen in the past. That being said, animations for those same models are still terrible and breaks immersion.

One of my main complaints about Bethesda games is the lack of impact from weapons. I'm glad to see they've largely addressed this issue and people and animals for the most part look like they've been hit with a shotgun from 2 feet away. Human enemies specifically recoil appropriately, though sometimes the ragdoll physics can go a bit out of control.

Dogfighting in the game seems cumbersome. Allocating power between 5 or 6 different weapons and systems means less time for flying and avoiding fire. That being said, avoiding fire is damn near impossible in the beginning. There no defensive or evasive maneuvering. The whole goal is to get on the enemy ships blindside, hide behind an asteroid or facetank the shots in a game of chicken. The last strategy is particularly infuriating when you are playing chicken with multiple ships trained on you. Get past one and turning to get behind it, means your still in range of two other ships. The battle at The Key is a prime example of when the dogfighting completely falls apart.

Once you get bigger and better ships, ship battles then end up having an opposite problem. Instantly you are OP. Which is equally boring. It's to the point where I don't see a reason to spec into the various ship upgrade skills. Because the game doesn't require them to win battles anymore.

The dialogue in the game is well done, however. I find it particularly delightful to be embroiled in morally gray decision making, persuading individuals. I like the affirmative negative and in-between choices, as well as the option to inquire for information before making your decision, even delegating the decision to your companion or another character in your stead. It is pretty much on par with Baldur's Gate 3 though you do have to spend skill points to unlock other forms of persuasion, like diplomacy or intimidation.

Anything else I go into would probably be spoilers so I'll refrain from that.

Overall I give the game an 8.0/10. It's a great game, but has some flaws. Bought it on steam for the cool hundo. Don't regret the purchase.

These are the kinds of user reviews I can get behind. Truthfully, I can even get behind negative reviews too as long as it spells out just what irks you about the game in detail.
 

hlm666

Member
It rapidly peaked at 310k+ in arguably the best time of the first weekend and dropped sub-300 in less than an hour. With 1.5% of user score along with it. Starfield opening hours are literally scaring away the audience and I do have a feeling that the legs of the game will be even shorter than those of Halo Infinite (and that was f2p release with 250k+ peak online on Steam).

My guess, 350k CCU is the most positive number that Bethesda can hope for and for the game of scope, ambition, PR budget and pedegree of Bethesda this is frankly a slight public humiliation. Especially given that PC was always the biggest platform for Howard's games. Even Fallout 4 with it's mixed release reception from users peaked at 100k+ more. And no, I don't see Gamepass as a spoiler here. It's a dreadful experience on PC and you cant' use even the basic mods with GP build of Starfield.
They said it hit over 1 million ccu on all platdforms when the steam peak was ~250k. Also some mods work on the gamepass version as i'm using the DLSS +FG mod no problems. If PC is still the biggest platform there possibly could be more playing on pc gamepass than steam.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
IMO, MS really should go Sony route for their big games. Give it at least 6 months to a year before releasing on GamePass.

That said, who knows, Phil and Co have the numbers, but then again they have the support of one of the largest Corpos in the world.
The problem isn't just the time period. The problem is the expectation and the inevitability of a game joining the subscription service.

It works for Sony only because they are unpredictable and keep it intentionally vague. Horizon Forbidden West joined the service after 12 months. The Last of Us 2 still hasn't joined PS Plus after 37 months.

PS Plus subscribers cannot accurately predict when Sony's first-party titles (big or small) will join the service, so they end up not relying on it and just buying the game.

Even if Xbox says that games will join after 6 months, Game Pass subscribers will just wait for 6 months, giving the game time to get it patched and optimized, knowing that it will join Game Pass after 6 months because there's no ambiguity.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
With how much "hype" NEON was getting, when I got there and saw that the "city" was literally a single street with shops encircling it. . .

I get you dislike the game and that's fine, but your description of Neon is a bit off. At one end of that street is Ryunjin corporate where an entire faction quest takes place. Then there is a side street exit that takes you down to Ebbside which is basically the cities crime underbelly consisting of a few rival gangs.

Is it comparable to CDPR's Night City in anything but aesthetic? Of course not. Night City is one large city, not a bunch of isolated cities on multiple planets. Either way, it isn't just a single street with shops either.
 
Last edited:

bender

What time is it?
I get you dislike the game and that's fine, but your description of Neon is a bit off. At one end of that street is Ryunjin corporate where an entire faction quest takes place. Then there is a side street exit that takes you down to Ebbside which is basically the cities crime underbelly consisting of a few rival gangs.

Is it comparable to CDPR's Night City in anything but aesthetic? Of course not. Night City is one large city, not a bunch of isolated cities on multiple planets. Either way, it isn't just a single street with shops either.

So...two streets?

200w.gif
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
How long until it reaches Fallout 76 levels? :messenger_grinning_sweat:
I don't think it will hit Fallout 76 or fall below that review score (71.74%), but it sure is close.
  • Fallout 76 had a total of 89,220 reviews.
  • Starfield so far has a total of 50,000 reviews.
  • Fallout 76 has 27.53% negative reviews.
  • Starfield has 23.98% negative reviews.
If Starfield's negative ratio stays roughly the same (<25%), it will settle somewhere around 73%, ~1.25 points above Fallout 76.

But significantly more reviews may change that situation.
yazenov yazenov - Sorry, mate, looks like I was wrong.

The negative review percentage for Starfield has already crossed 25% in less than 16 hours since I posted the above comment. It is now 25.03% after just 13,500 new reviews joined in.

DZHmunf.jpg


At this speed, assuming the number of incoming user reviews does not dry up suddenly, it can hit Fallout 76 numbers.
 
Last edited:

AALLx

Member
So is that it? 313,993 CCU on Steam? People have been swearing up and down not to read into the 250k CCU during EA and the 270k CCU during release and that people should wait for the weekend. Do we wait for the second weekend? The third weekend? When is it going to beat BG3's CCU?
 
When is it going to beat BG3's CCU?
Quite possibly never. Of course, it’s not a completely fair comparison because Game Pass, but I still never imagined that Starfield wouldn’t be able to beat Fallout 4 CCU peak when Steam was a fraction of what it is today.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
yazenov yazenov - Sorry, mate, looks like I was wrong.

The negative review percentage for Starfield has already crossed 25% in less than 16 hours since I posted the above comment. It is now 25.03% after just 13,500 new reviews joined in.

DZHmunf.jpg


At this speed, assuming the number of incoming user reviews does not dry up suddenly, it can hit Fallout 76 numbers.

Lots of the negative reviews on Steam are about poor performance and crashes. I'm pretty sure the game hasn't received a single update on PC so can't blame folks for being pissed about technical issues.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
For those of you lingering on about steam player count being the most important metric ever, dont forget that games like Goose Goose Duck is the 10th highest ever at 700,000, Lost Ark peaked at 1.3M and Top 20 games like Capcom Stadium 1 and 2 games are top choices at almost 500,000 each.

If peak concurrent player counts are so important, then games like GoW at 73,000, Horizon at 56,000, R&C and 9,000 and Returnal at 7,000 must means these are the worst games ever. Vampire Survivors has a higher rating, more concurrent player count and all time peak count higher than any of these games. In fact, VS currently has a higher concurrent player count than all of these combined even if you include DG, Uncharted and Last of Us too. A 8-bit looking indie game has more players playing it now than all these combined.

 
Last edited:

AALLx

Member
Quite possibly never. Of course, it’s not a completely fair comparison because Game Pass, but I still never imagined that Starfield wouldn’t be able to beat Fallout 4 CCU peak when Steam was a fraction of what it is today.
I see some people even saying 1M+ Steam CCU or "bigger than Elden Ring"; for the second coming of Christ that will save the Xbox brand and herald Microsoft into a new age of gaming... this seems more like a wet fart. MS should really learn to tone down on being their own hype man.
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
For those of you lingering on about steam player count being the most important metric ever, dont forget that games like Goose Goose Duck is the 10th highest ever at 700,000, Lost Ark peaked at 1.3M and Top 20 games like Capcom Stadium 1 and 2 games are top choices at almost 500,000 each.

If peak concurrent player counts are so important, then games like GoW at 73,000, Horizon at 56,000, R&C and 9,000 and Returnal at 7,000 must means these are the worst games ever. Vampire Survivors has a higher rating, more concurrent player count and all time peak count higher than any of these games. In fact, VS currently has a higher concurrent player count than all of these combined even if you include DG, Uncharted and Last of Us too. A 8-bit looking indie game has more players playing it now than all these combined.

It is not the most important metric ever however it is an interesting metric when trying to judge success/estimate sales.

The 2 comparable day one, full priced, AAA releases to Starfield this year, Hogwarts Legacy and Bolder’s Gate 3, peaked at 875k & 880k. Last year’s tentpole PC release, Elden Ring, peaked at 953k.

BGS have huge pedigree on the platform.
 
Last edited:

ZehDon

Member
Lots of the negative reviews on Steam are about poor performance and crashes. I'm pretty sure the game hasn't received a single update on PC so can't blame folks for being pissed about technical issues.
With DF shining a light on the clear lack of NVidia optimisation (45% advantage for AMD?!), combined with 80% of Steam users have an NVidia card, Bethesda shot themselves in the foot. For a good number of users, it's going to run like crap unless they voluntarily make it look like crap.
 

jm89

Member
If peak concurrent player counts are so important, then games like GoW at 73,000, Horizon at 56,000, R&C and 9,000 and Returnal at 7,000 must means these are the worst games ever.

Terrible comparison. Alot of those Sony games main audience is on playstation whilst bethesda games main audience is on pc.

Not only that those sony games released on pc 2 years or more after there original launch on playstation. So effectively people on pc are paying close to full price for 2 year old games.
 
Last edited:

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
For those of you lingering on about steam player count being the most important metric ever, dont forget that games like Goose Goose Duck is the 10th highest ever at 700,000, Lost Ark peaked at 1.3M and Top 20 games like Capcom Stadium 1 and 2 games are top choices at almost 500,000 each.

If peak concurrent player counts are so important, then games like GoW at 73,000, Horizon at 56,000, R&C and 9,000 and Returnal at 7,000 must means these are the worst games ever. Vampire Survivors has a higher rating, more concurrent player count and all time peak count higher than any of these games. In fact, VS currently has a higher concurrent player count than all of these combined even if you include DG, Uncharted and Last of Us too. A 8-bit looking indie game has more players playing it now than all these combined.

Although we prefer the number of copies sold as the best metric, it is Microsoft that keeps insisting that player count is the most important metric. 🤷‍♂️

We're happy to go back to the number of copies sold if that's what you prefer 😛
 
Last edited:
For those of you lingering on about steam player count being the most important metric ever, dont forget that games like Goose Goose Duck is the 10th highest ever at 700,000, Lost Ark peaked at 1.3M and Top 20 games like Capcom Stadium 1 and 2 games are top choices at almost 500,000 each.

If peak concurrent player counts are so important, then games like GoW at 73,000, Horizon at 56,000, R&C and 9,000 and Returnal at 7,000 must means these are the worst games ever. Vampire Survivors has a higher rating, more concurrent player count and all time peak count higher than any of these games. In fact, VS currently has a higher concurrent player count than all of these combined even if you include DG, Uncharted and Last of Us too. A 8-bit looking indie game has more players playing it now than all these combined.

I might be exaggerating, but I felt like the hype behind the game was comparable to Elden Ring and Hogwarts Legacy, hell, maybe even comparable to Cyberpunk and those games had insane player counts during their first week. Yeah, I know there is an obvious console war angle behind the whole Steam player count thing, and that GP might be affecting the player count on Steam. But as I said, with the hype I don't think it was unrealistic to expect this game to be a little bit closer to those other hyped games.
 

Elysium44

Banned
They said it hit over 1 million ccu on all platdforms when the steam peak was ~250k. Also some mods work on the gamepass version as i'm using the DLSS +FG mod no problems. If PC is still the biggest platform there possibly could be more playing on pc gamepass than steam.

No chance whatsoever, game pass on PC is niche, I bet the numbers are miniscule and if they weren't then you can be sure Microsoft would be proud to release them. Just look at the few hundred reviews the game has on the platform compared to 50,000+ on Steam. Why is Microsoft so very opaque about meaningful numbers? We can only draw the obvious conclusions.

The Xbox app is a dreadful clunky experience on PC, everything from viewing what games are available, searching for them, installing them, is made as slow and frustrating as possible. Phil Spencer is either unaware of this or doesn't care. Everything about the Xbox division seems to encompass this lack of care for the customer experience.
 
No chance whatsoever, game pass on PC is niche, I bet the numbers are miniscule and if they weren't then you can be sure Microsoft would be proud to release them. Just look at the few hundred reviews the game has on the platform compared to 50,000+ on Steam. Why is Microsoft so very opaque about meaningful numbers? We can only draw the obvious conclusions.

The Xbox app is a dreadful clunky experience on PC, everything from viewing what games are available, searching for them, installing them, is made as slow and frustrating as possible. Phil Spencer is either unaware of this or doesn't care. Everything about the Xbox division seems to encompass this lack of care for the customer experience.
Man, that avatar though...

Didn't know Craig was a cameo character in Starfield after such an iconic presence in Halo Infinite :messenger_grinning_smiling: (y)
 

Thyuda

Member
I might be exaggerating, but I felt like the hype behind the game was comparable to Elden Ring and Hogwarts Legacy, hell, maybe even comparable to Cyberpunk and those games had insane player counts during their first week. Yeah, I know there is an obvious console war angle behind the whole Steam player count thing, and that GP might be affecting the player count on Steam. But as I said, with the hype I don't think it was unrealistic to expect this game to be a little bit closer to those other hyped games.
No, you're absolutely right with that assumption and people telling you anything else are at least on some level of cope.

To be fair, Starfields numbers are okay, good even, but they are not extraordinary, and at this point, MS needs extraordinary. And people telling me that MS cares more about Gamepass, this is the metric to go, well, maybe, but I'm not so sure anymore, all the vagueness about subscription numbers and how many people actually use the service actually... Because, oh boy, if you really think all that matters is subscribers and how many people pay per month you are going to be in line for a rude awakening in the future.
You might think Gamepass is the best deal in gaming right now, but let me tell you, subscription based models all around different industries are going to bite us consumers in the ass sooner or later. Just give it time.
 

kikkis

Member
No, you're absolutely right with that assumption and people telling you anything else are at least on some level of cope.

To be fair, Starfields numbers are okay, good even, but they are not extraordinary, and at this point, MS needs extraordinary. And people telling me that MS cares more about Gamepass, this is the metric to go, well, maybe, but I'm not so sure anymore, all the vagueness about subscription numbers and how many people actually use the service actually... Because, oh boy, if you really think all that matters is subscribers and how many people pay per month you are going to be in line for a rude awakening in the future.
You might think Gamepass is the best deal in gaming right now, but let me tell you, subscription based models all around different industries are going to bite us consumers in the ass sooner or later. Just give it time.
I don't really see gamepass biting me in the ass in any point. As consumer I just look for the best prices and products and if game pass value plummets then I just don't re sub.
 

Thyuda

Member
I don't really see gamepass biting me in the ass in any point. As consumer I just look for the best prices and products and if game pass value plummets then I just don't re sub.
Now that the price is 15 dollars I just don't see it anymore. It's still worth it if you are really short on money and play like a maniac, or if you're not sure and just want to try out 5-6 games in a row, but for me? Let's look at starfield, with 15 dollars GP and around 70 for the game tha's 4.6 months of gamepass if you would've bought the game, so instantly not worth it to me, since there's no way I'm "only" going to play a Bethesda game for 5 months.
I played the most recent forza's through GP and I wish I didn't - I would like to come back to it occasionally, but cannot justify the 15 dollar GP tag nor the price for the full game to me.
 

hlm666

Member
No chance whatsoever, game pass on PC is niche, I bet the numbers are miniscule and if they weren't then you can be sure Microsoft would be proud to release them. Just look at the few hundred reviews the game has on the platform compared to 50,000+ on Steam. Why is Microsoft so very opaque about meaningful numbers? We can only draw the obvious conclusions.

The Xbox app is a dreadful clunky experience on PC, everything from viewing what games are available, searching for them, installing them, is made as slow and frustrating as possible. Phil Spencer is either unaware of this or doesn't care. Everything about the Xbox division seems to encompass this lack of care for the customer experience.
Well PC isn't the biggest platform for the game then, ~250k ccu on steam vs 750k+ for the rest and it's probably pretty safe to say streaming to phones and tv's isn't much of that and if your correct and pc gamepass is miniscule there's 2 to 3 times as many playing on console than PC.
 

DJ12

Member
Although we prefer the number of copies sold as the best metric, it is Microsoft that keeps insisting that player count is the most important metric. 🤷‍♂️

We're happy to go back to the number of copies sold if that's what you prefer 😛
Guaranteed to be a good number, even if you had no intention of buying it, when it's sitting there and installable without any extra outlay, chances are your going to try it to see what all the fuss is, install it, find out the performance is utter garbage and uninstall it like I did and you are part of the statistics.
 

hlm666

Member
So is that it? 313,993 CCU on Steam? People have been swearing up and down not to read into the 250k CCU during EA and the 270k CCU during release and that people should wait for the weekend. Do we wait for the second weekend? The third weekend? When is it going to beat BG3's CCU?
When you count other stores and platforms? BG3 was pretty much steam exclusive for a month right (if we ignore early access).

 

Elysium44

Banned
Well PC isn't the biggest platform for the game then, ~250k ccu on steam vs 750k+ for the rest and it's probably pretty safe to say streaming to phones and tv's isn't much of that and if your correct and pc gamepass is miniscule there's 2 to 3 times as many playing on console than PC.

I mean I can't be sure, only Microsoft know the true numbers. We can just look at it and try and draw inferences.

I would love to see a breakdown of this million figure but I doubt we'll get one. This is just one of the reasons Steam is popular, transparency.
 

Spukc

always chasing the next thrill
I found a 200 year old generation ship, launched at sublight speed from Earth to colonize another planet, and I discovered the people born and raised on said ship all spoke with clearly distinct Earth accents like Russian, African, English etc. Are you joking? Did the Africans isolate themselves in a ghetto in Cargo Bay 3 for two centuries? Did the Russians conquer and establish a fiefdom on deck 9? Bethesda's writers have clearly never experienced a truly multicultural society, because it doesn't work like this. After growing up together in a community sealed inside a spaceship they should speak the same English accent, and probably a strange form of English that distinctly diverged from what everyone else speaks after two centuries in isolation. But that idea was just too clever for Bethesda.
I found a 200 year old generation ship, launched at sublight speed from Earth to colonize another planet, and I discovered the people born and raised on said ship all spoke with clearly distinct Earth accents like Russian, African, English etc. Are you joking? Did the Africans isolate themselves in a ghetto in Cargo Bay 3 for two centuries? Did the Russians conquer and establish a fiefdom on deck 9? Bethesda's writers have clearly never experienced a truly multicultural society, because it doesn't work like this. After growing up together in a community sealed inside a spaceship they should speak the same English accent, and probably a strange form of English that distinctly diverged from what everyone else speaks after two centuries in isolation. But that idea was just too clever for Bethesda.
I found a 200 year old generation ship, launched at sublight speed from Earth to colonize another planet, and I discovered the people born and raised on said ship all spoke with clearly distinct Earth accents like Russian, African, English etc. Are you joking? Did the Africans isolate themselves in a ghetto in Cargo Bay 3 for two centuries? Did the Russians conquer and establish a fiefdom on deck 9? Bethesda's writers have clearly never experienced a truly multicultural society, because it doesn't work like this. After growing up together in a community sealed inside a spaceship they should speak the same English accent, and probably a strange form of English that distinctly diverged from what everyone else speaks after two centuries in isolation. But that idea was just too clever for Bethesda.
 
the shills are annoying but the mental breakdown and denial is understandable.
they were uber-hyped for years to believe
game supposed to be a cultural phenomenon, repeat of skyrim, gotg etc. etc.

honestly i’d be surprised if anyone is still talking about it two months after release at this point.
They will, the quality is undeniable in the base game. However, for that too happen, the mods need to be totally transformative. Im talking actual space travel, maybe some crazy modders will even mod in landing from orbit. Skyrim was a borefest sandbox, Starfield is close to an mmo in space.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
They will, the quality is undeniable in the base game. However, for that too happen, the mods need to be totally transformative. Im talking actual space travel, maybe some crazy modders will even mod in landing from orbit. Skyrim was a borefest sandbox, Starfield is close to an mmo in space.
These two things cannot be true at the same time.

“Quality is undeniable in the base game.”
“Mods need to be totally transformive.”

If a game is good (as it should be), it need not rely on mods. And if mods need to transform the game, then the base game left a lot to be desired.
 

Dick Jones

Gold Member
I'd say the biggest chunk of the negative responses are as a result of the promise not living up to expectations. A similar scenario happened to No Man's Sky. The game isn't bad, but the hype was the problem for people.

People playing the game need to give Starfield a fair shot, park the expectations and go in blind. If you like it, you like it And if you don't thats fine tooas long as you have it a fair shot. The same goes for every game you try.
 

Thyuda

Member
These two things cannot be true at the same time.

“Quality is undeniable in the base game.”
“Mods need to be totally transformive.”

If a game is good (as it should be), it need not rely on mods. And if mods need to transform the game, then the base game left a lot to be desired.
I hate this argument. Yes, if the game is reliant on mods, it's not a very good game and most certainly shouldn't be sold at full price.

I play guitar, there's amazingly good guitars out there that you can mod yourself to be even better, but you don't pay a premium price for these mod platforms, you pay significantly less. The fact that Bethesda first party studio releases have become so heavily associated with mods is not a good thing for the quality of the game.
 
Last edited:

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
I hate this argument. Yes, if the game is reliant on mods, it's not a very good game and most certainly shouldn't be sold at full price.

I play guitar, there's amazingly good guitars out there that you can mod yourself to be even better, but you don't pay a premium price for these mod platforms, you pay significantly less. The fact that Bethesda first party studio releases have become so heavily associated with mods is not a good thing for the quality of the game.
Exactly. Bethesda is selling games (at $70 no less), not modding platforms.
 

Bernoulli

M2 slut
I'd say the biggest chunk of the negative responses are as a result of the promise not living up to expectations. A similar scenario happened to No Man's Sky. The game isn't bad, but the hype was the problem for people.

People playing the game need to give Starfield a fair shot, park the expectations and go in blind. If you like it, you like it And if you don't thats fine tooas long as you have it a fair shot. The same goes for every game you try.
and everyone expected BGS to deliver more than NMS because they have a bigger team more experience, time and almost unlimited funding thanks to MS
 
These two things cannot be true at the same time.

“Quality is undeniable in the base game.”
“Mods need to be totally transformive.”

If a game is good (as it should be), it need not rely on mods. And if mods need to transform the game, then the base game left a lot to be desired.
Nah the quests ( side and the bigger factions quests that go on and on ) are phenomenal. Thats the bones of the game that is of high quality ( not quite cdpr level) for a big rpg like this. If they failed that no matter what mods dress up the game its still gonna suck.
 
Top Bottom