201
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
201 points (84.8% liked)
Games
30466 readers
688 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
You're right, getting out and moving around and hoping into the pilots seat of your ship is cool and I love to see that stuff. However, I don't know why it always has to tip toward violent encounters instead of just having the ability to feel immersed in a space ship or station.
This is what killed Starfield for me. My character is a down on his luck diplomat who cares for his retiring parents and has to take up a mining job...
Nope, murder hobo. Literally in the tutorial.
I have to agree. Games tend to resort to violence immediately now, no need for justification. I didn't imagine Starfield would be a shooter at all in fact. Ultimately it was almost exclusively shooting
And a terrible one!
I get the desire to compare the two games but Starfield tried too hard to color inside the lines by giving a story and lore while simultaneously trying to make an open ended sandbox which gave us neither. There's a LARPing town of cowboys with dirt roads existing a few minutes from a hyper advanced planet with platinum roads and somehow they haven't made contact? The cowboys haven't progressed their dirt and wood town despite being in spitting distance of a planet of machines that could fabricate advanced tools in seconds?
Star Citizen seems to take the Dark Souls approach of light narrative, heavy world building, "go learn the world by experiencing it."
I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted here...
But I would honestly say that the only things I liked about Starfield are the things you're kind of dismissing. The story and ambiance pieces worked really well, and I ONLY wanted that part.
Every time I had to do anything space travel, combat, space combat, or inventory management, I died inside.
I also felt like the cities and locations were tiny and didn't feel lived in or real. Basically the immersiveness of the game which thrives on immersion was not handled well so I was left with a terrible shooter.
Well the story held the game back because the game wanted to be more open than than the story allowed and vice versa where the game held the story back because a lot of areas were underdeveloped or don't make sense with where they are for the sake of the story they wanted to tell. It felt like two conflicting ideas at the core which ended up with what we have.
Why are cowboys within trading distance of a future tech planet? How have they not interacted to a point where they don't need dirt roads? The only answer seems to be for the sake of being neat and is baffling. Empty planets being explained as being on purpose to 'get more joy out of discovering ones with things on it' and just.. it was astoundingly average and competes for the worst Bethesda game against 76.
Bethesda excels at world building and it was disastrous to watch them fail at that.
Yup. I agree with all of that. It was very disjointed at every stage.
Then let us raise our glasses in agreement and hope Cloud Imperium can make Star Citizen as well as they hoped.
Because an FPS avatar is the body many people are most used to inhabiting in game worlds.
If you want people to feel immersed in an environment, you have to give them the virtual body they’re used to.
Like imagine you’re playing Battlefield 5, and then UFOs land and you go on a big space adventure. If you’re not still able to pull out that tommy gun and fire rounds the same way, your body feels different. It doesn’t feel like you’re there.
FPS is the biggest genre with the most resources in it. That makes it a standard for virtual environments everywhere.
That's the entire thing they're doing. The violent encounters are being planned for, obviously, but they're not a requirement.
Star Citizen's approach seems to be to add the ability to do as many things as possible while giving you the option to define how you want to interact with them. Of course, you're probably going to have to defend yourself from the stray pirate or bandit with whatever you end up doing but that's par for the course.
You should be able to avoid violent encounters but yeah you would be limiting where you can go.
That's the ultimate goal though. Just last night I flew from a mining outpost on a moon to find resources, scanned a whole bunch, pulled out of my ship with a mining buggy, mined a bunch, and then logged out from my bed within the ship. 0 combat. That's a life they want to have possible and I'm all for it! lol
I think it's just that fps stuff sells and all the COD kiddies wouldn't look at SC at all if they didn't focus on pewpew everything. Hell they have a cargo ship that has an advertisement of it shooting its guns ....lol ffs why? It's just marketing bs.