Starfield

Space stations

https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/6099

I'm guessing these were already in the game code.

edit: Been playing around with it. My first station caused the game to crash if I tried to open the decorator UI, loaded an old save and built a new one and it works.
I left and went to Venus, slept for like 3000 hours and everything inside saved, so the cell doesn't reset.

However, I can't access the ground Outpost where the station beacon is located anymore. If I try to fast travel to the Outpost OR the landing site, I spawn in an empty void.
So this means I can't delete or modify the station after leaving the outpost. This happened with both stations.

Starfield_stations.png
 
Last edited:
Space stations are basically a no go. They cause tons of problems with the game. Far more than the Class M ship parts do.

Edit: According to the what I've seen on this, it's a use at your own risk type of mod.
 
Last edited:
New community patch a few days ago. Some things that jumped out at me.

The Concealment skill will no longer override the magazine perks from Va'ruun scriptures or interfere with Void Form.
The Rapid Reloading skill now correctly provides bonuses while throwables are equipped.
Click to expand...

I knew rapid reloading was bugged. Thought I was going insane.
 
I'm on NG+11 at the moment, finally, so I can try another playthrough if I want, with new dialogue choices (supposedly). Unfortunately I'm having a bit of a hard time actually committing to another full playthrough of the main story. Because it's kind of a boring main story. I'm kind of skeptical about there actually being meaningful choices, too. I remember when I was going through the UC questline and I had to get approval from Freestar Collective, I thought "well that shouldn't be too hard, I'm a Freestar Ranger you know!" I go into the embassy and they don't even acknowledge that at all. There were just a lot of other things like that, where I realized that every questline was pretty much developed in a silo. There's no crossplay between them, and it was really disappointing. So I see the main quest also being low effort like this.

Does anyone know if Freestar Collective and UC questlines have any NG+ options, or is it just the main quest?
 
polonyc2 said:
Starfield's DLSS update will start beta testing on Steam next week

The eagerly awaited DLSS patch (with Frame Generation) will also include HDR support "and other optimizations and improvements"...

https://twitter.com/BethesdaStudios/status/1719782889414357000
Click to expand...

Good. I was looking to start this one soon. If I select the beta branch and an update comes out for the main game, will it update to the latest stable release version, or will I have to uncheck the beta version? I can't recall if Steam treats the regular release build and beta builds as two separate installs.
 
StoleMyOwnCar said:
My annoyance is Todd acted and kept acting like this was pretty much going to be the absolute best game ever, and the culmination of all his hopes and dreams. Many 10/10 critic reviews feel bought out. And then you have Bethesda fanboys that are just blindly agreeing. Then you get in, and find that demonstratively it is only a few of the things it made you think it was, to anywhere near quality level promised. When I watched the ads (this was after I had the game; I normally don't watch much hype stuff before I play anything), I realized that all of Todd's words came off the same way as me in college, attempting to inflate the importance and quality of my shitty essays.

The game can still be a moderately enjoyable voyage. I said that from the getgo, but it's a very far cry from what they tried to make it seem like. A 6/10 or 7/10 rating is about right. It's not weird to keep playing a 6/10 or 7/10 game after you're invested, even after you realize it's mediocre.
Click to expand...

I think as with everything else, the secret to happiness is low expectations.

I didn't watch any of the trailers, parttake in any of the hype, or listen to pretty much anything this Todd guy said before the game launched, and I'm quite enjoying it :p

If you avoid the hype, games are more fun :p
 
chameleoneel said:
Wild that on a heavily collaborated AMD game: FSR3 isn't being added at the same time or even, before DLSS.
Click to expand...
Majority of Starfield playerbase is on Nvidia, DLSS is polished and trivial to implement, so from standpoint of benefitting most players soonest I can see some logic. And FSR3 is still half baked ("released" to meet a promised-by date, but still beta "technology preview" internally), plus only exists in 2 subpar games. AMD may have also asked Bethesda to hold off on FSR3 until it's improved a bit more, since once it's in a high profile game and can be directly A/B compared to DLSS, the results may not be a good look for FSR3 if more improvement is needed.

Bethesda will also have their own concerns when adding anything to the game, because it creates both an expectation and endorsement in players' minds, meaning if people don't like what they see then Bethesda and the game would take a hit.

Bethesda undoubtedly has FSR3 operational in an internal build, and either Bethesda, or AMD (or both) may have decided it's not yet where they want it to be.
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
I think as with everything else, the secret to happiness is low expectations.

I didn't watch any of the trailers, parttake in any of the hype, or listen to pretty much anything this Todd guy said before the game launched, and I'm quite enjoying it :p

If you avoid the hype, games are more fun :p
Click to expand...
Basically, this.
I rarely pay much attention to the hype the team that is overseeing creation of a game tries to drum up. The head of our internal "Dev house" promises he can have whatever app we need up and running within 2 weeks. I then go to the guys actually doing the coding to find out how much time it will really take to deliver what is needed.
As for this game, It ticked enough boxes for me to pre-order (especially considering i got it on discount), but that was just looking at what the game was and the gameplay videos. I expected Fallout in space, and I mostly got that. First play through was very enjoyable, lots of fun quests. Shipbuilding is addicting for me. Looking forward to mods, but that is mainly to enhance the "after" game. I did hit heavy burnout after NG+, and everything felt kind of hollow in the current "after". Now i mostly just mess with ship builds and go out looking for fights when i play.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I think as with everything else, the secret to happiness is low expectations.

I didn't watch any of the trailers, parttake in any of the hype, or listen to pretty much anything this Todd guy said before the game launched, and I'm quite enjoying it :p

If you avoid the hype, games are more fun :p
Click to expand...
It is for sure. I don't even know that low expectations is the secret, but rather no expectations. Just don't get yourself expecting a game to be X or do Y, just let it be what it is, and when it comes out decide if you want to play that or not. Take the game as it is, not as any sort of thing you want it to be.

Part of why I think Starfield is getting the angy reaction it is, particularly the people who will post an angy review after playing for 150 hours, and then play another 150 hours after the review is that is a space game and those are something people build up expectations in their head to be MASSIVE. I'm sure Bethesda and their marketing played a part, but really I see this happen with every open space game: People build it up to be a fantasy life simulator, where you'll get to be Han Solo or Captain Picard and you travel an unlimited galaxy meeting tons of interesting characters, getting into epic adventures, and basically just playing an unlimited, open world, TV show or movie.

Of course that isn't possible, there's no way to make a galaxy-sized game and pack every inch full of interesting and fun shit to do. But that's what people want, that's what they've built up in their minds... So when they don't get that, they are pissed. They wanted a fantasy alternate-life simulator, but one with only fun stuff, and so they aren't happy when they just get a video game.

I always try to keep myself from getting hyped about games, and then just look at them and take them for what they are. If they look like something I'll have fun with, I play them, if not I skip them.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
I think as with everything else, the secret to happiness is low expectations.

I didn't watch any of the trailers, parttake in any of the hype, or listen to pretty much anything this Todd guy said before the game launched, and I'm quite enjoying it :p

If you avoid the hype, games are more fun :p
Click to expand...
Not necessarily low expectations, but grounded expectations instead of over-inflated or borderline delusional ones. And avoid preconceived notions about what the game should be.

I stop watching any trailers or looking for info about a game as soon as I decide I'm interested in it. Because if a game looks interesting then I want to experience every aspect of it first hand, and not through breadcrumbs left by leakers, or worse early access influencers, or even marketing BS.
 
M76 said:
Not necessarily low expectations, but grounded expectations instead of over-inflated or borderline delusional ones. And avoid preconceived notions about what the game should be.

I stop watching any trailers or looking for info about a game as soon as I decide I'm interested in it. Because if a game looks interesting then I want to experience every aspect of it first hand, and not through breadcrumbs left by leakers, or worse early access influencers, or even marketing BS.
Click to expand...
I honestly don't keep up on "gaming news" at all.

Hardware news, yes. But I generally completely ignore "gaming news".

I find that I am happier that way.

I generally find out about titles through word of mouth, or mentions on forums, and when I do, I never watch videos or reviews or even trailers, and don't really read about them much at all. if I don't find out about a game until several months after launch, that is fine. If it was a good game at launch, it will still be a good game a year or two later. (heck, with modern releases, it may even be a better game a year or two later :p )

I know that I generally like big open world FPS titles with RPG elements, so if a game fits that mold, I will generally buy without much in the way of other information. If it is a total shit show, I can always return it under Steam's return policy.

With Starfield, I vaguely remember a news story on thefpsreview from like a year ago, that something named Starfield was coming. I made a note of it as "potentially promising", and may even have added the title to my "wishlist" on Steam so I wouldn't forget about it, and then mostly forgot about it until I started seeing pre-order folks who got them game early complain about performance the weekend before launch. (I always look up performance reviews to see how my hardware is holding up)

Then I decided to "pre-order" it so I could get access that weekend and do some performance testing because it looks really interesting and different from a performance perspective, and well, now I have many hours in it and I have enjoyed most of them.
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
I generally find out about titles through word of mouth, or mentions on forums, and when I do, I never watch videos or reviews or even trailers, and don't really read about them much at all.
Click to expand...
Me too, but not out of choice. I simply haven't found a gaming site worth following since the one I used to follow shut down many many years ago.
I'm more apathetic about HW news. I don't care about the day to day news, and I only look into what's worth buying when I actually need to buy something for home or for the office.
Zarathustra[H] said:
if I don't find out about a game until several months after launch, that is fine. If it was a good game at launch, it will still be a good game a year or two later. (heck, with modern releases, it may even be a better game a year or two later :p )
Click to expand...
I agree, although that doesn't happen too often, there was just one game in recent memory that I only found out about later: Terminator Resistance. With how few interesting and exciting games there are nowadays I usually learn about them before launch or never.
Zarathustra[H] said:
I know that I generally like big open world FPS titles with RPG elements, so if a game fits that mold, I will generally buy without much in the way of other information. If it is a total shit show, I can always return it under Steam's return policy.
Click to expand...
I don't like to abuse Steam's refund policy, it is a last resort that I only used once thus far, when I made a huge misstep in buying a game. My gut feeling on games are usually right on the money. Besides most of the time it takes longer for me to decide that a game is trash than their grace period for refunds anyway, so I'd rather buy games third party for cheaper forfeiting the option for refunds.
Zarathustra[H] said:
With Starfield, I vaguely remember a news story on thefpsreview from like a year ago, that something named Starfield was coming. I made a note of it as "potentially promising", and may even have added the title to my "wishlist" on Steam so I wouldn't forget about it, and then mostly forgot about it until I started seeing pre-order folks who got them game early complain about performance the weekend before launch. (I always look up performance reviews to see how my hardware is holding up)
Click to expand...
I knew about Starfield since it was announced and I also knew instantly that I wanted it (despite FO76). I expected Fallout4 in space and that's exactly what I got, of course it has rough edges and shortcomings here and there, but still this is one of the best value I got for my money with a game. Going beyond 100 hours with a game is extremely rare for me, even for games that I love.
 
M76 said:
Not necessarily low expectations, but grounded expectations instead of over-inflated or borderline delusional ones. And avoid preconceived notions about what the game should be.

I stop watching any trailers or looking for info about a game as soon as I decide I'm interested in it. Because if a game looks interesting then I want to experience every aspect of it first hand, and not through breadcrumbs left by leakers, or worse early access influencers, or even marketing BS.
Click to expand...
I can't believe you don't like peep shows!
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
There's a 3rd ending for the UC questline you can enable with a console command.
Looks like cut content but it's fully complete. All voiced, even shows up at the end of the game recap.

https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/6415
Click to expand...
I can see why it was cut. With the two existing options there is a moral dilemma. But if you add this it becomes the obvious choice with not much room for second guessing.
 
Has anyone here gotten this to play in Windows 7 yet? I'm considering picking up the game if so.
 
ZodaEX said:
Has anyone here gotten this to play in Windows 7 yet? I'm considering picking up the game if so.
Click to expand...

Uh, You shouldn't be using Windows 7 anymore.

It went EOL in January 2020. It, like all software, should always be removed as soon as it goes EOL.

Only supported software and OS:es should ever be executed.
 
324.8 hours in and loving every minute of Starfield. Haven't gone to NG+ yet as I want to finish a few more quests and finish off the last of the research. Also trying to get every Steam achievement before hitting NG+. Only four more to go!

1699396142640.png

This is currently my favorite long distance go to weapon for the time being. Thinking about swapping it out for the corrosive version picked up last night.

1699396095612.png
 
I have gotten kind of strange love/hate relationship with this game. Having gotten past the 40 hour mark and still feel like I haven't done much in the game. Some missions are interesting, but a lot are just fetch quests and so many bugs and issues even for a Bethesda game, which says something. Probably will do most story missions in the game, but not sure I will want to do a new game+ in it. It is annoying that a lot of skills takes forever to acquire and that the game's skill tree isn't really built for those who prefer to just play the game once (prob around level 30 and don't feel like the skills I have gotten are that meaningful outside of health, shields and carrying capacity).
 
How does this game compare to The Outer Worlds? I’ve seen both described as Fallout in space. Seems like both games received positive or above average reviews overall, but also, it seems like both kind of disappointed a lot of folks or at least didn’t live up to the hype (which feels like most games these days).

Just wondering where folks who have played both feel money and time are better spent?
 
Lateralus said:
How does this game compare to The Outer Worlds? I’ve seen both described as Fallout in space. Seems like both games received positive or above average reviews overall, but also, it seems like both kind of disappointed a lot of folks or at least didn’t live up to the hype (which feels like most games these days).

Just wondering where folks who have played both feel money and time are better spent?
Click to expand...
Outer Worlds has better shooting, but worse quests and a less interesting universe. Starfield has more of a fallout/skyrim feel, but small locations with lots of empty space around and lots of loadscreens makes the world feel empty. Fallout 3 and Skyrim was kind of empty spaces with small towns, but it felt like people lived there while starfield feels like there are lots of people but they are just placed into the location for you to have someone to interact with. I do prefer Starfield over Outer Worlds as Starfield feels more focused on the RPG elements while Outer Worlds felt like a OK shooter with RPG elements.
 
Lateralus said:
How does this game compare to The Outer Worlds? I’ve seen both described as Fallout in space. Seems like both games received positive or above average reviews overall, but also, it seems like both kind of disappointed a lot of folks or at least didn’t live up to the hype (which feels like most games these days).

Just wondering where folks who have played both feel money and time are better spent?
Click to expand...

Idk what ehvis is smoking, Outerworlds has a far more interesting universe than Starfield, its plot is tighter, quests largely more interesting (less fetch or tick the box quests). This is largely due to Outer Worlds being a smaller and more focused title.

Shooting its on par, Outer Worlds has more weapon variety and more sci-fi guns (like one that shrinks your enemies as you shoot them). Outer worlds has better set pieces as its a smaller scope of game, I think their space station was better than Starfield's Neon.

Outer Worlds imo had a better plot as well, grounded in a potential reality of space travel. The voice acting is better, the characters are more interesting, but its a bit of a tounge in cheek comedy and that may turn some off.

It has its downsides, the power scale is way off so bu the end of the game nothing is remotely challenging even on the hardest settings. It lacks space flight segements, it has little modding, once you play it your kinda done.

Starfield is more like the scafolding of a game, more so than any prior Bethesda Elder/fall game. There is definately potential to be made amazing, but its bare bones as it is. Don't get me wrong I have enjoyed my 80 hours of starfield so far, but its not a tight experience, and Outer Worlds is by the nature of being only so open world, and more on rails.

Really, Starfield is an Scrolls type game, its massive (too massive) as a result its content gets stretched pretty thin. Its pretty though, shooting is tight, combat fun, and universe engaging enough. Its characters are flat and quests largely dull.

Outer Worlds is a smaller game, with some Scrolls influence, but also a touch of Bioshock and Borderlands. Its a tighter experience and if you like RPG shooters its worth playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top