Starfield remake created in two days actually lets you fly seamlessly from space to the surface
stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to 
pcgamesn.com
A Starfield remake, of sorts, has been created in 48 hours, incorporating seamless travel between planets, something missing from the actual Bethesda RPG.
You are viewing a single comment
It is essentially just a tech demo BUT, I would say they’ve touched on what I wanted from the space travel.
You can take off, fly the ship, point it up, and then boost off into space. That’s fun, that’s what I wanted, and I don’t think it’s really expecting that much.
“It’S NoT ReAlIsTiC”, none of it’s realistic, it’s a video game ffs.
It’s a fun and engaging mechanic that I’d expect in a great space game.
Bethesda’s seeming disdain for anything that could be considered a fun and seamless mechanic is frustrating. And fanboys seemingly have no expectation that Bethesda games should actually get better and improve on their weak areas.
I think Bethesda "fanboys" (like myself) just really like the core experience (warts and all) I play NMS when I want to lose myself in a beautiful seamless scifi setting and i play starfield when my focus is on engaging with faction and character storylines and some campy space encounters. I kinda like how janky bethesda games can be, reminds me of playing tabletop RPGs and all the weird janky shit that happens in those games too. I like that I can be the golden boy of the crimson fleet and still join up with the freestar rangers. I make up a little story for my character and act it out and have a lot of fun doing so.
The only thing I could do without is the loading screens. I don't mind that landing on a planet isn't seamless, but i mean... loading screen to get on ship, loading screen to get into space, loading screen to fly to different planet, wait until scan finishes, loading screen to land on planet.
That's the worse part for me. If it was just a short cut scene for landing on a planet, I think that'd be 100% fine.
I just don’t think it’s good to let a company get away with not improving.
The small improvements they have made in Starfield are alright, but it feels like the bar was set with Skyrim and they can’t even really match something from 12 years ago.
I do not have high hopes for TES VI and I’m half expecting something extremely dated, as based off FO4 and Starfield I think the studio’s best days are behind them at this point.
Starfield seems like a pretty stark improvement over Fallout 4's shortcomings, so I don't think it is fair to say that they aren't improving. Just looking at my own playtime, I bailed out of Fallout 4 at the 20 hour mark, but I'm 60 hours into Starfield and haven't slowed down at all.
Or maybe game development is just hard? Why haven't other "better" developers created a game that improves upon Skyrim?
Look at Baldur's Gate 3. It's "small improvements" to the type of game that Larian has been working on for many years at this point.
In what way? There are plenty other RPGs that I prefer over Bethesda games.
..and honestly, some of those are old school ones. I feel like there's just some things always missing from Bethesda's newer titles.
I'm not really talking about preferences. I'm asking more about the niche that games like Skyrim/Fallout/Starfield fill. If it is so simple to just make "Skyrim but better" or "Starfield but better" then where are all the games from other developers that are just that?
Or from another angle. Where is the Path of Exile for Skyrim?
Yup. People will always bring up some games like Witcher 3 as "better than Skyrim" and in terms of the roleplay elements within the story? Sure. Do the games have some similarities? Sure. They're both open world RPGs in a medieval fantasy setting. But beyond that, the comparisons fall apart. Somebody just looking for any RPG experience might well prefer Witcher 3 over Skyrim, but somebody looking for another Skyrim experience is not gonna find it in Witcher 3. Same goes for comparisons for NMS and Starfield. Does NMS have seamless planetary flight and Starfield doesn't? Absolutely. Can you scan plants and wildlife in both? Sure. But, again, beyond that the comparisons fall apart.
I don't even like skyrim BG3 is objectively a much better game, least Bethesda can do is esspecially with the funding they got from Microsoft is not sell skyrim again but with a space reskin this time
I just don't see atmospheric entry/exit as being that important to my immersion, yes it was kind of cool the first time you did it in NMS, seven years ago, but it got old fairly quickly even in that game. I'm happy for Starfield to have a more ME like set up and focus on other areas of the game.
Same. It's cool for maybe 5 times before you just stop caring. Only thing I miss is actually flying around the planet, and that's purely for finding the best basebuilding spot.
Or that the technology available doesn't really make this type of setup reasonable?
Star Citizen is trying to do this and it's been how long with how much money spent?
Would Starfield be a better game if they sacrificed the quests/content/companions and just made a game that was more like Elite Dangerous or No Man's Sky?
I mean, CIG has been trying to make a game that does what you want for the last 13 years and they aren't close yet. Maybe it's not as easy as you want it to be?
Star citizen has been able to do "all that" for at least 4 years, and most consider it a glorified tech demo
In Star citizen you can also do all those things with other players too
If you think "they aren't close yet" it might be worth trying it out during one of the free fly events - the only cost is your time to download and play it.
Having an opinion is fine, having an informed opinion is better
I actually backed the original Kickstarter.
If it's close, when is the release date?
If things continue the way it has been, never would be the best estimate of a release date.
Depending on the last time you logged into a session, the current status is between playable and entertaining and nightmare of lag/desync issues making it something most people would want to avoid
In a purely technical sense, if CIG locked the code branch and set 100% of the creative teams to the task, the current system could replicate a Starfield level game and do so in a seamless manner.
It wouldn't be without issues but something I consider plausible
If it's just a glorified tech demo, then it doesn't seem like it's able to be compared to a released and completed game? Unless the designation of tech demo means something I'm not aware of.
It's like that that old programming joke:
I have a strong suspicion the project will fall to development hell and never really be completed in the sense other games are.
I only know of it from memes about it's development, but I would agree from what I know. Scope creep seems to be a thing there. Ambitions are great, until they get in the way of every other aspect of the game lol
Well nms had all that seven years ago at launch
A good point, and the popularity and sales of NMS reflect that
Yea meant to reply to the commen you dere replying to welp
As far as I can tell I was replying to you, I agree that NMS had those things at launch
Nah lol what I am saying is that I meant to reply to the same comment that you were earlier replying to anyway have a nice day/night