Starfield Xbox Series X Review | NoobFeed

NoobFeed Editor Azfar Rayan writes - Starfield is like Skyrim and Fallout 4 fused in space. Expect nothing amazing, but give it a shot if you like Bethesda role-playing games and are looking for something with a sci-fi twist. While not flawless, the game has plenty of content to keep you occupied for quite some time. There is clear evidence of learning from previous work on ranged combat, and melee combat feels satisfying in general.

[Crows90]

Melee combat feels satisfying...lol
Funny review.
8/10 is worse than fallout and elder scrolls so do they mean it's a failed fuse?

[Flawlessmic]

I don't think it's that much worse than those games or a failed fuse.

For me the issue is it's that it is exactly those games, there hasn't been any innovation or something to be like oh hey they have elevated there type of games to a current gen standard.

For me its literally fallout in space, which ain't exactly bad, I love fallout but yea 10 years in the oven, all the hype from Bethesda that this would be genre defining and what not is why it's not setting the world on fire.

It's basically a good fallout game in space, probably with a lot more flaws actually but still loving the 30+ hrs I've put in so far

[shinoff2183]

I'm enjoying it but in fallout I enjoyed reading computer stories and notes, stuff like that. This one kinda lacks in that area. Most of the books are repeats that I'm finding. The computers are few and far between which is worse imo then fallout considering its the future. Even the slates don't say much at all. I'm about 50 hours in. Its a huge huge game for sure let's fill it with stuff. I do believe some things will be updated, maps etc. I don't want it to sound it's all negative at all. I'm enjoying it more then any other game this year even ps5s biggest exclusive from June. I'd give stsrfield an easy 8

[Flawlessmic]

yea look I'm not really digging the stories told anyway, i generally just skip through the dialogue as much as i can, it could also be im tired of actual dialogue system as opposed to the story still not sure which it is or if its both.

never been a fan of telling story's through books and stuff like that so cant say it bothers me, for me the key hook of getting missions and flying planet to planet to complete them is fun enough even if uninspiring which is the best way i can describe the game, uninspired.

I don't think there will be a game this year that i play more than starfield that's for certain, I've definitely had more fun and been more amazed by other games this year though. TOTK, BG3 and for all its flaws FF16 blew my sock off regularly which made up for the low points. haven't had a game make me feel the way FF16 did in a long long time.

Currently would score it the same as you, i had it a bit higher but the way they did the upgrade skills thing is annoying me as for anything past rank 1 i need to use or do something related to that skill and it doesn't take into account previous actions.

Realised i need to upgrade a certain skill to buy a better ship and now i have to do all these space battles even though i have the skill points just sitting there waiting to be used on the pilot skill.

[raWfodog]

One of the few balanced, honest, and informative reviews I’ve read so far. It wasn’t fanboy-blind to the game’s shortcomings while still being impressed with the high points. I feel an 8/10 is very good for the game at this point and hope that it will get even better as future improvements and DLC get added.

[S2Killinit]

It is steadily falling in metacritic. Its now down to 85 with only 61 reviews. I predict 83 is where it will land.

[anast]

It might even hit 79.

[S2Killinit]

It reached the 83 I predicted already. Maybe you were right. Its going down even more because it only has 71 reviews so far.

[generic-user-name]

Keep in mind the PC version has roughly the same amount of reviews, making the total something like 120+, maybe more since last I checked. My point being I'm not expecting too many more reviews to come in, it could stay at 85.

[S2Killinit]

Most games have well over 100 reviews per medium. As in over 100 for console and over 100 for PC. Starfield barely reached 61 reviews because MS limited the number of reviews at launch. Sending copies to a limited number of reviewers.

[randomvoice]

Lol so much for the whole GOTY talk

[generic-user-name]

No, usually with multiplatform (at least with simultaneous releases) one platform has far more. I just looked up Hogwarts Legacy for instance. 92 reviews on PS5, 20 on PC and 20 on XSX. Starfield is unique because BGS titles are PC focused, hence the more even split.

[S2Killinit]

Are you saying MS didn't limit the reviews at launch? Its a fact that they did.

Also you are comparing a multiplatform release to one that is on one console and PC. Currently Starfield is at 61 reviews. An exclusive such as Horizon FW has 126 reviews on PS5.

[generic-user-name]

"Are you saying MS didn't limit the reviews at launch? Its a fact that they did."

They did, but not in the significant number you seem to be implying they did. Eurogamer and maybe one or two others?

"Also you are comparing a multiplatform release to one that is on one console and PC. Currently Starfield is at 61 reviews. An exclusive such as Horizon FW has 126 reviews on PS5."

That's irrelevant to my point. HFW has 126. Starfield has roughly the same when adding both Xbox and PC versions together. Had HFW released simultaneously on PS+PC then its reviews would have been split up too. There's not going to be another 60 XSX reviews popping up for it. So unless Eurogamer and the other couple outlets that didn't get review copies are going to dish out extremely low scores like 2, 3 or 4; then it won't move the needle much.

[S2Killinit]

If it wasn’t significant, then why limit reviews?

Also, it definitely was significant because the score is falling since release. That means the limiting of reviews had a material impact on review score and consumer perception.

They literally had less than 50 reviews at launch.

Other games that are console exclusive and available on PC have significantly more cumulative reviews than Starfield did at launch.

You are conveniently ignoring that there were even less reviews for Starfield at the time of release because of MS’s restricting the reviews.

Therefore, saying that it “wasn’t substantial” is misleading and patently false.

[generic-user-name]

>If it wasn’t significant, then why limit reviews?

Significant in terms of numbers. How many did MS blacklist? Can you name them?

"That means the limiting of reviews had a material impact on review score and consumer perception."

Many of the reviews that came in 1+ week after launch were positive reviews.

"They literally had less than 50 reviews at launch."

You keep ignoring that the reviews are split 50/50 between PC and XSX. 50 on XSX and 50 on PC. There was over 100 reviews at launch in total. Which is pretty standard for a big AAA title.

"Other games that are console exclusive and available on PC have significantly more cumulative reviews than Starfield did at launch."

I already showed you proof with Hogwarts Legacy that shows otherwise.

"You are conveniently ignoring that there were even less reviews for Starfield at the time of release because of MS’s restricting the reviews."

Again, not in any substantial matter. Can you name all the restricted ones that appear on Metacritic? Eurogamer, Metro, who else? It's been nearly 2 weeks since early access started, when will this wave of missing reviews appear? What's taking so long?

[S2Killinit]

Why do I need to name them?

You say “many of the reviews after release were positive” but the score has been falling from the original 88 down to 85 so far. So that negates the “many reviews” point.

What do you mean “significant”?
I already showed you that the overall metacritic score has fallen from 88 to 85 (and falling still for all we know). That is proof in the pudding. Would there not be a different perception of the game if the score was 85 at launch as opposed to 88? Of course. If you refuse to acknowledge how this is material and “significant” then that is on you.

Ps: hogwarts argument is flawed. Read my previous comment.

[S2Killinit]

Ok, now it is sitting at 83 with 71 reviews. Still not material that they limited the reviews? At launch it was 88!

I mean, its going down and fast. Its already reached the 83 I predicted above. Maybe the guy that said 78 was right.

So what do you think?

[generic-user-name]

God is a Geek 9/10 - Sep 8th
BaziCenter 9/10 - Sep 11th
MMORPG.com - 9/10 Sep 12th
Pocket Lint 8/10 - Sep 15th

I'll be surprised if it drops another point, could even go up one again. It's been over 2 weeks, there'd need to be a lot more negative reviews coming in to drop it to the 70s, what are they waiting for? The reviews are about done. Eurogamer and Metros last minute 6's did 2 points of damage at the end, but it is the end.

[S2Killinit]

Its gone down from 88 to 83 and still falling. That is not normal.

[generic-user-name]

A 5 point drop isn't unheard of. TLOU2 was at 96, dropped to 93. The more reviews come in, the harder it is to keep the points up. But you say it's 83 and still falling, yet there's been no new reviews in over a day, there's not going to be many more reviews added to it at this stage. Maybe one or two, unless you know of reviewers who are still working on their review 16 days after it released?

[S2Killinit]

Now you are just making stuff up.

[generic-user-name]

If you're going to accuse me of lying, at least point out where the lie is so I can show you how wrong you are.