mansoor1980
Gold Member
is he standing on a planet?
is he the CREATOR himself?
is he the CREATOR himself?
-
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 - Official Gameplay Trailer Reveal (2023)
- Status
Mephisto40
Member
It's a cutscene that plays out after you select your landing zone from the planet map, you cannot fly from space to the planets surface and land, the engine is not capable of doing that
Also a lot of the planets you can't even land on, when Todd said you can "explore" them, what he meant was there is a mini game like Mass Effect, where you can send explorer drones down to the planet and they show you resources you can mine. Occasionally it will pop up with a quest to do on the planet after "exploring" it, which you can land at a specific spot on the planet and play a linear "dungeon"
Mister Wolf
Member
What are the odds this gets Direct Storage? Would be moronic that Forspoken supports Direct Storage this year but first party titles from next year do not.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
The fidelity of terrain in No Man's Sky is play-doh and even then pop in can get you an epileptic seizure.
Jennings
Member
Looks like Starfield solved the pop-in problem by utilizing empty environments.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
This is why I've bought my kid this book. You need to start early or you grow up to be like this guy. Completely clueless. Sad.
I'm asking the usual question.
I have nothing bad to say about this game.
If you don't like something, then you don't have to answer.
Why is one of the main advertising platforms in the world showing one of the main games of the next year gaining so few views per day?
And let's be honest. Everyone knows that those 17 million views were faked.
This is obvious when you need to look at the ratio of likes to views.
This just doesn't happen.
And yes. This is a legal cheat. They bought out preview spots on other videos.
This rule does not apply to other trailers.
Look at Forza Horizon 5.
The announcement got 10 million views.
And the gameplay demo is five more.
I understand what you're talking about, but as a rule, big games have at least one video, on one of the channels, which always takes a very strong lead if this game is really expected and popular.
Lukaku's First Touch
Member
How can you show of gameplay with framerate like that? Nothing shown merrited framedrops like that on a beefy pc.
Mister Wolf
Member
That surprised me too. I would've been worried if I hadn't saw the same thing happen with RE8's first reveal.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Well...I have a more logical answer, its a new IP. Many times its hard to get those views and build that hype when most seeing the title don't know it is.
So lets say next gen or something, Starfield 2 is announced, it will likely get more views as anyone seeing that title KNOWS what that video is. So new IP take a bit of time to gain that traction as lets say a Call Of Duty or something.
So you are indeed asking a rational question which I feel really does have a logical answer. I also agree with the user you are replying to, (not any of that arrogant stuff btw, no need for any of that), I think many of us fans who know the team, know that its big news when they reveal a title, so the context of it being a Bethesda title is bigger then many might realize.
Any other team can do a teaser like that and its not getting those same views. Why? Well we have doubts, its from a no name type team. Lots of trailers imho "look" cool, but the context of team, publisher changes everything and we see that trailer with more hype KNOWING that the team behind it can pull it off.
Last edited:
nemiroff
Gold Member
First, ignore those who do authority speak on the answer to this without citing a source or at least minimum a disclaimer. It's not confirmed until it's confirmed.
With the information we have right now it seems like auto-landing is the more likely option, but with my assumption that there'll be added flexibility in the form of "land anywhere" as I've suggested below.
But again: It could be that this is specifically the map option and that you could still choose to fly down to the surface manually, who knows..
Last edited:
mansoor1980
Gold Member
Mephisto40
Member
You are really lineing yourself up for dissapointment thinking like this imoFirst, ignore those who do authority speak on the answer to this without citing a source or at least minimum a disclaimer. It's not confirmed until it's confirmed.
With the information we have right now it seems like auto-landing is the more likely option, but with my assumption that there'll be added flexibility in the form of "land anywhere" as I've suggested below.
But again: It could be that this is specifically the map option and that you could still choose to fly down to the surface manually, who knows..
killatopak
Member
We'll know once we see PC min spec requirements. HDD means loading screens.
Farawayfromhell
Member
Starts the countdown, can't wait.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
People are worried that there will be loading screen between flying in fucking space and landing on a planet and I'm here worried that there will be loading screen when entering a building interior. 
Mephisto40
Member
We know the engine they are using isnt capable of doing something like this already
killatopak
Member
I dunno. There are Skyrim mods that remove loading screens for any city.
Obviously not all loading is removed but it is a working concept in that engine.
Warablo
Member
Wouldn't it be cool to low fly over a planet? This doesn't look possible right now. Though maybe they will rovers or other transportation vehicles for the surfaces.People are worried that there will be loading screen between flying in fucking space and landing on a planet and I'm here worried that there will be loading screen when entering a building interior.
I am not sure Starfield is doing that badly but its all largely trueview numbers and that's a massive unknown.
nemiroff
Gold Member
Yeah we're getting well aware of your ethos rhetoric regarding this topic in Starfield threads.., but I can assure you the concern is misplaced.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
I hope there's something similar to vats. I love vats.
If it has that then it looks pretty much perfect for me.
If it has that then it looks pretty much perfect for me.
Mephisto40
Member
My ethos is thinking logically and not expecting the same engine that powered Fallout 4 to all of a sudden be able to support a full on space simulator with seamless planetary landing from space like star citizen or no mans sky
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Member
Them supporting Direct Storage so the loading of compressed assets can occur as swiftly as possible is a must. On Xbox and PC.
Last edited:
nemiroff
Gold Member
Then say exactly that instead of running around on a high horse acting like you own the absolute truth without citing a source or explaining your thoughts.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Yeah, but the NMS engine was built from the ground up specifically with the goal of being able to do that (and generate quadrillions of planets). The rest of what the game has is really just gravy on top of that fundamental feature. Can the Creation Engine be coerced into doing this?
Shmunter
Member
Building for next gen without is unthinkable
Craig of War
Banned
I say 99.9% that Starfield get DirectStorage with it being a 1st party game now & it massive open world need quick loading times
Shmunter
Member
Should be doable on next gen with the ssd
Mister Wolf
Member
I've been thinking about it and I'm aware Direct Storage is a part or The Series X's Velocity Architecture but I dont believe any title on console is using Direct Storage not even their first party titles. Just look at the load times for Forza Horizon 5:
If Horizon 5 were truly already using Direct Storage on consoles why would it be loading slower or exactly the same as the Win32 PC version. I dont believe its using Direct Storage at all.
I believe every single console game we've seen on Series X is using the same Win32 API as its PC counterpart.
Last edited:
I think MS are bad at selling their products so I am like 80% sure it won't 'support' directstorage on PC, really hope to be wrong.
Honestly do you really care if it supports directstorage if it has a fast enough load time in game? if so, why? also what is fast enough for people is what i am interested in?
personally as long as I ain't waiting more that 10 seconds for something, i am generally happy. it's diminishing returns personally.
Shmunter
Member
You’re right, looks like cpu loading. Cross gen possibility being the cause, although should have done it anyway.
captainnapalm
Member
My only concern with this game, aside from the usual concerns for every new game that it's going to be written by a bunch of woke monkeys bashing away on typewriters, is if they lean heavily into the procedurally generated planets and quests thing. Like a lot of people, I hate that too.
People criticising the art style because its not colorful enough can f right off. Some of these NMS shots going around are an eyesore. Much prefer the realistic grounded sci-fi look.
People criticising the art style because its not colorful enough can f right off. Some of these NMS shots going around are an eyesore. Much prefer the realistic grounded sci-fi look.
Last edited:
Good company release a 'killer app' whenever there is a a new hw feature or api but MS alot of times don't except for like Office.
its weird and annoying.
Mister Wolf
Member
I knew I wasn't crazy. In our threads about Direct Storage people would constantly drone on that the consoles already have Direct Storage but obviously they are still using legacy API(Win32) support for whatever reason. I bet even Flight Simulator has similar load times.
Last edited:
Kssio_Aug
Member
That's the ONLY thing I really missed watching the gameplay trailer. I always loved using VATS in Fallout. I hope they´re bringing it back in Starfield, and didn't show it yet because they were focusing on showing the improvement in gunplay.
Craig of War
Banned
The game can have state of the art graphics but if the RPG mechanics and quest design sucks the game will be ass
Starfield is not a 10-15 hour single ending you play once & never touch again kind of Game ok
It a full blown massive RPG that is 100-5000 hours type of game that are play for generations
It clear that you are not gone to play Starfield so just go play your little linear cinematic game wile us big boys play this ok
Philfrag
Banned
This Starfield showcase was weird for me. I love Bethesda games, even the mediocre ones. I think they build amazing worlds and no other game can immerse me in a space like Bethesda. That said they've obviously been losing it a bit. They have a lot more competition now and the usual Bethesda tricks don't surprise as much as they used to. So Starfield really had to impress. Conceptually I think Starfield has some awesome ideas. The customization, the 1000 worlds to land on and being able to land anywhere, being able to fly your ship, its all cool stuff. But the showcase felt off to me. Usually in these showcases Bethesda will make an effort to have long stretches where the character is running around and doing things, interacting with the world and characters etc, but this was so segmented. Once the character got off the ship and before he even got to the base there were like 5 cuts. Why? well if the videogame industry has taught us anything recently its because of performance......damn, that performance. The whole thing felt like it was just hanging on. The framerate was bad in a lot of the segments, whoever was piloting the main character was doing that slow walking thing they usually do to hide frame drops. So whilst I was impressed by some stuff I saw, my cynicism is taking over with this one. With the state of the industry I have every right to feel that way.
If I'm going to guess how this will go down, This is Bethesda's Cyberpunk. It was will launch terribly, have parts of it missing. The content will be spread so thin across those 1000 planets and people will feel soo burned that the only thing to stop them from burning down Bethesda headquarters will be the incoming Elder Scrolls which they will begin talking about a year after the botched release of Starfield. I really hope i'm wrong. Either way, mods will probably save this over time. Bless those modders
If I'm going to guess how this will go down, This is Bethesda's Cyberpunk. It was will launch terribly, have parts of it missing. The content will be spread so thin across those 1000 planets and people will feel soo burned that the only thing to stop them from burning down Bethesda headquarters will be the incoming Elder Scrolls which they will begin talking about a year after the botched release of Starfield. I really hope i'm wrong. Either way, mods will probably save this over time. Bless those modders
DragonNCM
Member
I have feeling that demo was not played by leaving person(or recorded playing). Movement & camera presentation from first person view was all scripted.No chance that any one will make that movement in real gameplay. With that bad frame pasing will be imposible to make good aming, also rewatching it several times first person aiming looks very laggy. Hope will be sorted out in time for launch.
Mephisto40
Member
They never showed or suggested this was a thing in the game
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
DragoonWalker
Member
That's right, best temper expectations. Todd always finds a way to sell us features that sound mouth watering and are actually in game but not what we thought they'd be/underwhelming in practice.
Given the way Bethesda games have always worked, their games are designed around loading you into locations that are differently sized when viewed outside and explored inside (ala the Tardis). My guess is the planets you can land on, whether they be all or only some, will be much smaller than they look from space. You'll be loaded into an instanced area, and when you reach the edge of the map you'll loop back around on the opposite side. It will technically be "the whole planet", but different from other space games where the planets are actually planet sized. This will work in line with and perfectly with how they've always handled dungeons/interiors.
Guerilla Munch
Member
Imagine showing this game to someone 30 years ago, watching their head explode, and then telling them that people were shitting all over it. Absolutely wild.
EDMIX
Writes a lot, says very little
Not really though.
We don't need all that though, those features exist in games right now. So those shitting on it, might be cause they've already seen those features. So that whole "30 years ago" only really makes sense if majority of those features were never done and this was first of its kind or something.
- Status