660°

Starfield Doesn’t Let You Fly Seamlessly from Space to Planet: ‘That’s Just Not that Important’

People might be making No Man's Sky comparisons, but here's a big difference.

Christopher707d ago

I mean, it is what it is, but let's not act like there aren't Indie developers with way less funding who have done it and have very similar gameplay elements in those arenas. Perhaps the issue is loading in heavy NPC/script-heavy type regions and faction elements on the fly versus doing it from a loading screen?

No biggie, but surprised.

porkChop707d ago

Yeah he mentions the engineering involved not being worth it for something a lot of players probably don't care about. I guess it makes sense. It would have been cool to me, but I could see a lot of players preferring to use fast travel or auto landing anyway.

707d ago
porkChop707d ago

What do you mean? You can space travel. You just can't fly from space directly into atmosphere and land on your own. Landing on planets will be a cutscene. You can still travel through space though.

senorfartcushion707d ago

It was impressive when it was shown during the No Man’s Sky debut but after actually playing the concept, it gets old pretty fast.

RaiderNation707d ago (Edited 707d ago )

I certainly care about it. Taking off and landing from planet to planet is one of my favorite things to do in No Man's Sky. It's so satisfying, feeling the shaking and rumbling of the Dualsense as a planet's atmosphere grabs you as you're hurling towards it's surface!

dumahim707d ago

Right. If I'm playing and I'm going from planet to planet a lot, do I really want to take the time to fly myself to orbit every time? It's not like launching your ship into orbit is going to be an awe inspiring event like a shuttle launch or something. Even then, it'd get old after a while. I mean, the public was pretty bored with launches by the time of Apollo 13.

Adrian_v01707d ago

If planets have varying gravities it would have been cool. Like in elite dangerous where landing on a high g planet is a feat not everyone can acomplish. If all planets are the same I guess it doesn't matter

DigitallyAfflicted707d ago

That could mean that you can not do low level flight over the the plant surface, shame if true. But we all have to wait to see...

BLow706d ago

You mean like when Rare decided not to render the actual body of the Kraken because it would be a waste of resources on a game that take place on the water lol. So they thought no one would jump in the water to explore so why waste the resource right?. Is it needed? No. But at the end of the day, it just shows how much passion and attention to detail your developers have and the love for their work to put out a quality product. Yes we can have pretty games but it's the attention to the little details that put them over the top. You may not care but there are plenty of gamers that do and I'm not going to sit here and make accuses for this company when a much small developer has done it.

Don't get me started on how the game looked, ran, and was missing basic details like footprints that robot didn't made when exiting the ship. No dust whatsoever from the footsteps. Nothing. That entire "demo" was heavily scripted and cut up. You can tell from the position of some objects, enemies, and even looking at the bullet count on his gun at times. Bullet trails not lining up to where he was firing. It was pretty clever but I bet most of you won't go back and really pay attention and will just let this slide on this 12 tflop console.

No disagree for me as you're entitled to your opinion. Happy gaming

porkChop706d ago

@BLow
1) I tried to make it clear I would have preferred the option. I do think it would have been better to have auto landing in addition to letting players land themselves.

2) Not modelling the kraken's body really isn't comparable to the engineering and asset streaming needed for orbit-to-surface landing and vice versa. The kraken could have been modelled easily, just like the megalodons were. That was a really dumb decision on Rare's part.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 706d ago
Jin_Sakai707d ago

It’s more time consuming than anything. It’s nice but I’m fine without it.

Christopher707d ago

No Man's Sky was developed by a small team over 3 years and had ongoing development by the same small team since then. That's since 2016.

Starfield started development in 2015.

I 100% get this decision, but let's not sweep it under the rug as if they aren't one of the development studios who could do it. We should expect more from studios like Bethesda, not less. Bethesda 100% could do fast travel and planet landing, they just designed around not doing it.

SyntheticForm707d ago

I agree with both you and Christopher. I guess I'm just old and not bothered as much, though I totally understand those who want and expect more.

I see that the gameplay looks as stiff as Fallout 4, which kind of sucks, but I'm still down for an open-world Bethesda adventure, and it looks interesting and engaging enough.

garos82707d ago

get the hell out of here with that damage control. the whole point of space exploration is the ability to get in a ship and fly around and "consume time" staring at the cosmos and deciding where to go next. No man sky had many problems but the flying around aimlessly was easily one of the best part

RosweeSon707d ago

Time consuming, they not doing it for charity they get paid.

Jin_Sakai706d ago

“but let's not sweep it under the rug as if they aren't one of the development studios who could do it.“

Of course they could do it. It’s just that they chose not to.

MontyeKristo706d ago

Christopher: Does he not mean more time consuming to actually fly into orbit to land? I don't know, that's how I read it. I don't think it's a huge deal, nor a huge loss. Cool effects, perhaps, but I'm not totally disappointed.

Jin_Sakai706d ago (Edited 706d ago )

@MontyeKristo

“Christopher: Does he not mean more time consuming to actually fly into orbit to land? I don't know, that's how I read it. I don't think it's a huge deal, nor a huge loss. Cool effects, perhaps, but I'm not totally disappointed.“

This is exactly what I was saying. It’s cool flying into orbit and landing on a planet but after you do it many times over it becomes pretty time consuming and I’d be fine without it.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 706d ago
lelo2play707d ago

People started complaining that Starfield played like No Man's Sky.
Now people are complaining that Starfield doesn't play like No Man's Sky.

Gamers really are whiny jerks.

Extermin8or3_707d ago

I mean having watched the gameplay it definitely plays like bo man's sky just apparently with les gameplay options.

RedDevils707d ago

You poor man No Man Sky? Interesting.

Christopher707d ago

I don't think most are upset it is more like No Man's Sky so much as what their games are known for wasn't shown off and leaves people wondering if this is more No Man's Sky than RPG.

SullysCigar707d ago

From what we've seen or been told so far, No Man's Sky is far more in depth from a gameplay standpoint and is indisputably a bigger game.

Even the interaction and personality in Starfield will be stifled by the fact there's no voicing for your character.

I'm glad it's been pushed back. It might give them a chance to reflect on the feedback and hopefully make the game we actually expected.

garos82707d ago

what are you on about? You happy with a space exploration without the flying to space element?

Gamers are entitled to whine about whatever the hell displeases them, as they are spending their hard earn cash on this products

kikicub707d ago

It is called "need rage" and it's hilarious

brewin706d ago

For real. I'm so glad it isn't a clone of NMS. It's a massive Bethesda RPG with some planet hopping. It's more about the planets and the story than just traveling in space aimlessly fitting between planets with boring random content. I'll take crafted moment's and story over randomly generated stuff any day.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 706d ago
707d ago
Profchaos707d ago

Yeah given the targets next generation consoles and PC's it's not far-fetched to utilise ssd in your hardware targets.

However starfeild being the last creation engine game before they switch to a new engine for es6 possibly doesn't support rapid asset loading.

So maybe this is more of a pr spin on a it would have been nice but our engine is held together by duct tape and dreams so we can't

alb1899707d ago

It doesn't matter who did it. It is just a decision made because they want the focus on other things...plus...is not the same graphical ditails and art to be compare with NMS.