A Sober Review of Starfield After 300 Hours
First, the verdict: this isn't the 'Elder Scrolls in space' I was hoping for. But it's addictively fun.
1. Pros
- The thrill of aimlessly exploring unknown planets in space is truly unmatched
- Quests have many branching paths, giving it high replay value
- Many flaws from past Bethesda games (combat balance, NPC AI) have been significantly improved
2. Cons
- Loading screens pop up constantly, breaking immersion again and again
- They advertise 1,000 planets, but in reality more than half are basically recycled terrain
- Ship piloting and combat are simpler than expected
3. Overall
Recommended for: people who enjoy wandering an open world without a care
Not recommended for: those who really need story immersion, or can't stand loading screens
If the first 10 hours aren't fun, you can just skip this game. If you get past 20 hours, you'll probably see it through to the end.
6 answers
Agreed, these days Bethesda games are all about the space exploration vibe.
Swapping in an SSD does reduce load times a bit, but consoles are out of luck. I agree that piloting battleships is simple, but there's fun in tuning your ships in the late game. And the New Game Plus mechanics are surprisingly deep—300 hours fly by.
Well, I finished it by getting immersed in the story, and it was fun. Maybe it's just a matter of taste?
Got a source? Is it true that half of the 1,000 planets are recycled?
I've also put in 200 hours, and that's a spot-on review. I admit I can't stop once I go past 10 hours lol. The only downside is the spaceship feature is pretty basic. Waiting for user mods.
Saying the reason for not recommending is loading? Doesn't loading get better with an SSD or something? At the very least, there are achievements.