It Could Take 130 Hours To Really Start Starfield, Bethesda Exec Says

Pete Hines says he needed to get past the main quest before Starfield ‘really [got] going’

4Sh0w295d ago (Edited 295d ago )

“80 hours in, I went from doing one game to a completely different game where I started really focusing on the main quest,” said Hines, “and then I got so caught up in the main quest, that I spent the next 50 hours just doing that. [...] I’m here to tell you that this game doesn’t really even get going until you finish the main quest.” -Pete Hines

-Doesnt sound boring at all to me, he's saying you can get caught up in side quests because obviously they are interesting enough that he lost track of time & spent 80 hrs doing them/exploring but yes the main story line is the best part where it really got going. The comment in context is fine but the same ones that been hating Starfield since MS bought Bethesda of course know its boring= Jelly.

Sounds good , although you got to take the devs word with a grain of salt, he's obviously trying to sell this game as the biggest adventure of a lifetime.

Becuzisaid295d ago

Dude, you're quoting the Bethesda PR guy. Not exactly the go to for reliable information. Hope you like the game, but start actually thinking for yourself. Trust me, very few Sony fans are "jelly" of your flagship darling. Some people can just think outside the hype.

Zombieburger638295d ago

They said the same things with fallout 4 and that game was boring. I’m expecting flat voice acting, mid side quest and some version of “a settlement needs your help”.

jwillj2k4294d ago (Edited 294d ago )

Come on, whose going to make it to 80 hrs before things ‘get going’ besides die-hards? I quit NMS after about 40 hours once the novelty wore off.

Profchaos294d ago (Edited 294d ago )

I feel like it's the same standard lines most RPGs throw at us like how we were told 60 hours in cyberpunk barely scratched the surface yet finishing the game was probably a 20 hour effort. Yet rdr2 promised a 69 hour game and actually hit that mark.

The proof is in the pudding realistically

I'm expecting a similar amount of depth to fallout 4 where the sidequests are what you make it just hope there's no 99 minuteman style missions or settlements that need my help

Exvalos294d ago

For fans of fallout and elder scrolls "like myself" this is amazing to hear

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 294d ago

Your comment sounds extremely generic…

S2Killinit294d ago

Boring is exactly what I thought when i read that.

jambola295d ago

that sounds awful
so if I don't have much time it could take months or years to start?

more likely to take 130 months to get to what they promised tbh

ModsDoBetter295d ago

The reaching, ridiculous.
Did you ever play a Bethesda game? Oblivion? Skyrim? Fallout 4? Massive quest lines.


Crows90295d ago

They never said you needed to play over 100hrs to get going...just a bunch of nonsense.

4Sh0w295d ago (Edited 295d ago )

No the nonsense is coming from to cult members like you who have been in every Starfield thread hating. Its not even hard to understand if you don't just want to knee jerk read the headline= sidequests and just exploring is interesting & time consuming, while the actual story/role playing/combat is where things really heat up/get going -which makes sense for a game like this. BUT We know why, only a particular crowd see's this as boring. I mean anything positive is not allowed to be said about an Xbox exclusive, even though devs ALWAYS swoon praise upon their games when doing the media rounds, especially just before launch -oh no not this *Xbox nonsense, only ps devs are allowed to praise their games lmfao= Jelly

shinoff2183295d ago

Olmyserio, not all of them. Wasn't fallout 3 you could beat in like 10 minutes at release

jambola295d ago

yes I played skyrim, fallout 3 and 4
none of them took that long to start, or feel like it really started

gold_drake294d ago

you know, ive seen that repsonse quite alot, and im not sure if you are actually serious or you have a tremendous amount of time on your hands.

that stuff doesnt fly anymore that "its a Bethesda game".

ModsDoBetter294d ago

"That stuff doesnt fly anymore that "its a Bethesda game"

What doesn't fly anymore?
Optional sidquests and ways to further develop the lore in a massive open world RPG?

I don't see the pitchforks out for Baldurs Gate 3 playtime.

Make it make sense.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 294d ago
Lightning77295d ago

Reading is crucial ppl. He's saying he's getting caught up in doing other things in the game because the game is that engaging but the game gets even better after you beat the main quest.

The closer the games to release the more downplaying will happen.

Seraphim294d ago

regardless of meaning, it's a bit of an asinine statement to make. It also makes it sound like people will have issues with the pacing of this game. Regardless, getting side tracked is a staple of open world games, it's really nothing new here. Simply put, there are better ways to get that point across while not giving someone a click bait title.

MarkSony2294d ago (Edited 294d ago )


Starfield - let it be clear MS deserves all the credit. They did a great job buying a developer and showed a lot of skill securing a game which would released on xbox regardless of the acquisiton. Now the xbox fans know what's it's like when a major exclusive is downplayed and knit picked into oblivion - Ps fans ago through it everytime Sony releases a AAA GOTY exclusive

anast295d ago

This is if you are a modder or have to fiddle with your PC to get it running properly.

Inverno295d ago

Bethesda are their own worst enemy with how they hype their games smh. It's close to release, let it speak for itself now.

Deathdeliverer295d ago

I fully agree. They are literally turning to off at this point.

Lightning77295d ago

Yet everyone was concerned because they were too quiet with no marketing a few weeks ago.

Some even suspected they would delay it again. Now your all mad because they keep talking about their own game that releases on Thursday night. (in the U. S.)

Which one is it?

Inverno295d ago

I ain't mad, I'm completely indifferent about this game. I think the correct thing for any product is to not generate too much unnecessary hype so that expectations aren't unrealistic.

slayernz295d ago

There's a bit of difference between marketing and blowing your own trumpet!

-Foxtrot294d ago

It's funny because they are part of a few studios/developers who could announce a game and release it within 4-5 months and it would still sell a ton.

They will hopefully do this with Elder Scrolls VI, the next time they announce it plan on releasing it later that year.

Inverno294d ago

They did it best when they announced Fallout 4 and released it a few months later. Definitely top 5 highlight of that years E3, something I had hoped would become a trend but did not.