• Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think this is fair enough, given it’s a Zero Punctuation review. And I think he nailed it when he said that it doesn’t have much of an identity of its own.

    As I said back here, “So my worry is that Starfield is just vanilla SF without any of the quirkiness, character, or personality that makes me love Fallout.”

    • emptyother@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fallout but takes itself more serious, I’d say. I have no love for the amount of silliness in Fallout after Bethesda took it over. The original Fallout had a better balance between seriousness and wackiness.

      But each to their own. :)

        • emptyother@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          But they did not revive the same character. I dont like the new character (but not enough to stop me from playing it). Fallout and Fallout 3 is as different as Baldurs Gate 2 and Baldurs Gate 3. Enjoyment is of course subjective.

          I also disagree with Yahtzee about Starfield missing character. It got the nasa-punk going for it, and makes it its own. I do agree the main story hook was the weakest of all BGS games I’ve played so far. And that planet exploring and base building loses it fun pretty fast.

        • CMLVI@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Seems pretty subjective, I have finished the main quest in precisely one Fallout game, Fallout 3, and it took me years to do so. Not because I was lost in the map or side quests or anything, it just never grabbed me. Fallout 4 was the same, same with New Vegas (the one I probably played the least).

          Maybe I’m just at a far end of the curve tho lol