this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
84 points (91.2% liked)

Starfield

2861 readers
1 users here now

Welcome to the Starfield community on Lemmy.zip!

Helpful links:

Spoiler policy:

Post & comment spoiler syntax:

<spoiler here>

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] all-knight-party@kbin.cafe 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not going to assume the way they made space is the same way they'd make a regular overworld in their older games. If it were easy enough to just do it like they always do, then they would've done it, I think.

No matter what I feel like that's a pretty big deal, having seamless transition through space, and it's not our place to armchair speculate that they could've done it without sacrificing much else, unless the person making the criticism is a crack programmer that could've stepped in there and been like "move aside, idiots, I'm here to cure all of your shitty design with ease and miserliness"

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No, we can still criticize design choices of major studios by comparing output to other studios without being experts.

[–] all-knight-party@kbin.cafe 2 points 1 year ago

Sure, but I think it's important to try to understand the limitations and costs of these things and why it wasn't already like that. If you whittle it down to strictly design choice then it seems braindead simple to have designed it that way to begin with, so the true answer of why it was done is probably more complicated.

Should there have been less loading screens? Duh. If there were, though, there would've undoubtedly been compromises and a difference in scope of content in other areas. It's worth criticizing, but at this point I doubt anyone from Bethesda could look through the internet without tripping over a "the loading screens suck" post