Starfield extended demo, looks great imo

[Legend]

[Legend]

It has so many awesome mechanics.

Base building where you can recruit people to maintain your base.

Full ship building were you also recruit your own crew.

Actually flying the ships and full massive planets, not just small maps like Outer Worlds.


One kinda funky thing though is that they don't seem to know Alpha Centauri has 3 stars lol. The data they have on the map screen is just for alpha centauri a but it's funky.

[BananaKing]

What the point of making the outer worlds when they have this?

[Legend]

What the point of making the outer worlds when they have this?

Outer Worlds has a big focus on charachters and building your squad. I don't know why Microsoft greenlit it either but they'll probably do at least this one element better than Starfield.

[Legend]

I'm so freaking hyped about this. Almost all of my dream features seem to be included.

The planets often look pretty barren and with a thousand I'm sure most will be pretty bland, but that's pretty realistic with space. The map screen shows interesting points on planets so it seems they don't expect players to wander aimlessly.

Don't care about the story but it sounds like a solid foundation.

[the-pi-guy]

I'm so freaking hyped about this. Almost all of my dream features seem to be included.

The planets often look pretty barren and with a thousand I'm sure most will be pretty bland, but that's pretty realistic with space. The map screen shows interesting points on planets so it seems they don't expect players to wander aimlessly.

Don't care about the story but it sounds like a solid foundation.

I was thinking it was probably a dream game, the further the trailer went on.

[Legend]

I was thinking it was probably a dream game, the further the trailer went on.

I'll be really excited if literally any npc can join your crew if the requirements are met. Would be lame if it's just a screen that says "recruit 1 crew member for 10 gold."

Also wonder how they'll handle death in this game. Outer Worlds allowed you to kill literally everyone and the game would somehow keep working. Maybe Bethesda was tempted to copy that.

[Legend]

Very funny how some people are super hyped about 1000 planets and some people are super disappointed about 1000 planets.

In general there's a wide variety of reactions. Wish youtube still had the dislike button so we could know what people are thinking.

[kitler53]

To me it looks like

1. A game you could play for tens of thousands of hours.  

2. A game where you have to play for 100 hours between every moment of fun.  

I can see why it appeals to legend but this looks like my own personal hell.  

[Legend]

To me it looks like

1. A game you could play for tens of thousands of hours.  

2. A game where you have to play for 100 hours between every moment of fun.  

I can see why it appeals to legend but this looks like my own personal hell.  

I'll probably play on PC so that I can speed the game up if it's slow.

The thought of spending hundreds of hours in a single game horrifies me.

[the-pi-guy]

I'll probably play on PC so that I can speed the game up if it's slow.

The thought of spending hundreds of hours in a single game horrifies me.

Me: *looks at my 300 hour Skyrim save file*

Yes that would be terrifying.

[Legend]

It's interesting how much No Man's Sky poisoned procedural generation.

All big open world games use it a lot. Some like Horizon and Death Stranding also use it in real time.

Star Citizen is working on ~300 planets that look great and are more than good enough quality. Elite also has a whole galaxy of planets good enough for dead moons.

Yet everyone can only think of nms lol. The game has ~1,000 planets, not 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 planets.

Spoiler for Hidden:

<br>What if it&#39;s fake. Pick a spot to land and the game just makes a square map for your local area. When you go back to space, it&#39;s gone forever.<br><br>Would be hard to extend skyrim level persistence to 1000 real time procedural planets, so maybe they didn&#39;t.<br><br>Space works that way. You have to jump from location to location.<br>

[kitler53]

It's interesting how much No Man's Sky poisoned procedural generation.

All big open world games use it a lot. Some like Horizon and Death Stranding also use it in real time.

Star Citizen is working on ~300 planets that look great and are more than good enough quality. Elite also has a whole galaxy of planets good enough for dead moons.

Yet everyone can only think of nms lol. The game has ~1,000 planets, not 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 planets.

Spoiler for Hidden:

What if it's fake. Pick a spot to land and the game just makes a square map for your local area. When you go back to space, it's gone forever.

Would be hard to extend skyrim level persistence to 1000 real time procedural planets, so maybe they didn't.

Space works that way. You have to jump from location to location.

yes, all games do have procedural generation these days but it's used to fill in the gaps between hand crafted areas on a map approximately the size of 100 sq miles.

i don't really see a difference between 1,000 and 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 because even going up to 1 full size planet means increasing the size of the map from 100 to 196,000,000 sq miles which means:
1. the distance between hand crafted points of interest are now reeeeeeaally far apart due
2. ...or the points of interest are also procedurally generated which means nothing in the game is interesting (aka no man's sky's problem)

in looking at the video,.. i'd say starfield looks a lot like nms to me.  lots of terrain where you can already spot the repetition in just one screenshot.  it's just long expansive vasts of the same plant stamped over and over and over again.   now don't get me wrong,.. it's realistic.   if i were to have been an alien that landed on a planet earth untainted by humans my area would be grass fields in all directions for hundreds of miles.  

that's kind of what nms "poisioned".  before nms released the idea of a full universe to explore was very alluring.  ...but it's not actually fun.  it's impressive from a technology perspective but it's just not fun.  it's the same statement i said before of "tens of thousands of hours of gameplay but 100 hours between each movement of fun.   it's just hundreds of hours of traversing repetitive assets.

Spoiler for Hidden:

if nms can be persistent i&#39;ll bet starfield is too. &nbsp; at least the planets will be. &nbsp;might also just means there is only 1 npc area per planet to retain npc persistence.

[the-pi-guy]

yes, all games do have procedural generation these days but it's used to fill in the gaps between hand crafted areas on a map approximately the size of 100 sq miles.

i don't really see a difference between 1,000 and 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 because even going up to 1 full size planet means increasing the size of the map from 100 to 196,000,000 sq miles which means:
1. the distance between hand crafted points of interest are now reeeeeeaally far apart due
2. ...or the points of interest are also procedurally generated which means nothing in the game is interesting (aka no man's sky's problem)

in looking at the video,.. i'd say starfield looks a lot like nms to me.  lots of terrain where you can already spot the repetition in just one screenshot.  it's just long expansive vasts of the same plant stamped over and over and over again.   now don't get me wrong,.. it's realistic.   if i were to have been an alien that landed on a planet earth untainted by humans my area would be grass fields in all directions for hundreds of miles.  

that's kind of what nms "poisioned".  before nms released the idea of a full universe to explore was very alluring.  ...but it's not actually fun.  it's impressive from a technology perspective but it's just not fun.  it's the same statement i said before of "tens of thousands of hours of gameplay but 100 hours between each movement of fun.   it's just hundreds of hours of traversing repetitive assets.

Spoiler for Hidden:

if nms can be persistent i'll bet starfield is too.   at least the planets will be.  might also just means there is only 1 npc area per planet to retain npc persistence.

A lot of people do find those things fun.
There's a whole genre of games for exploring space.  

No Man's Sky is pretty well enjoyed. It got a bad rap at the start because it overpromised, but it's still a pretty popular game. No Man's Sky - Steam Charts
It's got 14,000+ players despite being several years old at this point.


I would also say distance doesn't really matter, what matters is how time consuming vs how fun it is to travel. If you have a rocket ship to go to a different place on the planet in 60 seconds, it doesn't matter if that distance is a mile or 5,000 miles.  

[Legend]

yes, all games do have procedural generation these days but it's used to fill in the gaps between hand crafted areas on a map approximately the size of 100 sq miles.

i don't really see a difference between 1,000 and 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 because even going up to 1 full size planet means increasing the size of the map from 100 to 196,000,000 sq miles which means:
1. the distance between hand crafted points of interest are now reeeeeeaally far apart due
2. ...or the points of interest are also procedurally generated which means nothing in the game is interesting (aka no man's sky's problem)

in looking at the video,.. i'd say starfield looks a lot like nms to me.  lots of terrain where you can already spot the repetition in just one screenshot.  it's just long expansive vasts of the same plant stamped over and over and over again.   now don't get me wrong,.. it's realistic.   if i were to have been an alien that landed on a planet earth untainted by humans my area would be grass fields in all directions for hundreds of miles.  

that's kind of what nms "poisioned".  before nms released the idea of a full universe to explore was very alluring.  ...but it's not actually fun.  it's impressive from a technology perspective but it's just not fun.  it's the same statement i said before of "tens of thousands of hours of gameplay but 100 hours between each movement of fun.   it's just hundreds of hours of traversing repetitive assets.

Spoiler for Hidden:

if nms can be persistent i'll bet starfield is too.   at least the planets will be.  might also just means there is only 1 npc area per planet to retain npc persistence.

No procedural generation is used seamlessly for essentially everything. It takes way too long for an artist to fully hand craft stuff over and over as designs are iterated. The vast open landscapes use procedural generation and the dense detailed cities use procedural generation.

Unlike NMS starfield at worst will have every procedural element verified by an artist. With 1,000 planets and only a fraction of them supporting life, a single artist in a week could veto everything that looks bad until good results are found. Spore used a similar method for its planets.



Yeah I mean npc and item persistence. In Skyrim you can remove stuff from your inventory and it'll just stay there forever.