• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    189 months ago

    The author’s arguing that BG3 makes Starfield look like a shallow RPG by comparison. Their broader point is that Starfield is behind the times compared to most RPGs released in the last couple decades, even compared to something like Fallout 3.

    • e-ratic
      link
      fedilink
      10
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      It’s even better when Bethesda themselves describes Starfield as the “next-generation of RPGs”. It’s the same type of Bethesda game that I’ve been playing for 15+ years just with a new coat of paint. If this is the next-generation, then the future has no ambition whatsoever.

      • @sugar_in_your_tea
        link
        English
        39 months ago

        That’s just marketing fluff.

        The game seems (to me) to essentially be FPS, Sci-Fi Skyrim, with some space fight minigames. There’s a lot of stuff you can do, but the main storyline is pretty short, the AI sucks, and most of the appeal is side content and looks.

        That’s what I expect from Bethesda, and that’s what they delivered. It’s only really “next gen” in the procedural generation department, so it’s basically a regular Bethesda game, with a little bit of experimentation thrown in. That’s what Bethesda delivers, and they deliver pretty consistently.

        I’m guessing there will be a ton of cool mods in the next few years for a deeper story, interesting space combat, etc.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      89 months ago

      Got you. To me it’s the style it gets communicated. Why not writing it like “Starfield needs to pace up to a higher standard” or similar?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        69 months ago

        For sure. That’s just how articles have to be titled to get clicks unfortunately. It can be annoying, but it helps keep journalism alive, so you take the good with the bad.