288
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by Buttflapper@lemmy.world to c/games@lemmy.world

Starfield steam page for the DLC currently shows eight user review score of 41%, making this one of the worst Bethesda DLC's released of all time. This is so horribly, shockingly bad for Bethesda, because it shows as a gaming company, they are no longer capable of delivering a really good gaming experience as they had in the past. Some of the reviews sum up quite nicely what is wrong with this DLC....

Less content than any skyrim DLC. Less than The Fallout 4 story DLCs. Doesn't change of the complaints people had with the base game, writing is still at a 4th grade level.

Quick: If you are looking to buy my answer is no, you aren't missing much content. I was really hoping to enjoy this DLC. Took about 4 hours for the main story and maybe 2 more hours to 100% the achievements.

These two reviews I think really summed up what Starfield has become, $70 for an AAAA title that has extremely little buy-in from the community, horrifically low amount of replayability and can be breezed through easily. It's mind-boggling to see this

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] zecg@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

I am really enjoying this downfall of Bethesda, Blizzard, Ubisoft and EA, more than I enjoyed anything they published in half a decade. I wish death also to Gearbox. It's coming and after Randy bought and promptly ruined RoR2, my schadenfreude is tingling.

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

I would have enjoyed it a lot more if they had kept making good games!

[-] Katana314@lemmy.world 63 points 2 days ago

Remember, folks: Microsoft kept these people, and fired the ones who made Hi-Fi Rush.

That, alone, was my signal the entire console was going to slowly burn down.

[-] Buttflapper@lemmy.world 31 points 2 days ago

Microsoft is a fucking ghoulish, evil company. The only reason they bought Bethesda was to own their IP. They have Elder scrolls, Fallout, and Doom Because of ID games. That alone is going to bring them so much money, if they ever want to sell any of those franchises in the future, they can sell them for a fortune. That's probably the reason why they acquired Bethesda to begin with. Laying off Hi-Fi Rush after they delivered an excellent product was just pure evil.

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 171 points 3 days ago

Remember when Cyberpunk fucked up their release. They knew they fucked up and owed it to the gamers. They told their board and stockholders to hold off, and that they needed to rebuild trust with their users before they could make line go up.

So they took their time, they redid many of the mechanics that people didn't like, the fixed all of the bugs, and then they released Phantom Liberty - one of the best expansions I have ever seen in gaming history. Good enough where it could have been a game on it's own.

That is how you rebuild trust with the community. You tell your stockholders to shut the fuck up and let you do what you do best. If they don't trust you to do that, then fuck em, they can sell their stock, why are they holding stock in a company they don't trust?

[-] dinckelman@lemmy.world 78 points 3 days ago

Post-2.0 Cyberpunk is one of the best gaming experiences I've had in a long time. You can tell it's a product of effort, and love for the project. They have taken in a considerable amount of feedback from pre-1.5.

Meanwhile, Starfield is a complete miss in just about every way imaginable, and the expansion has followed through the same footsteps. On top of that, the studio actively gaslit people who expressed disapproval, even when it was constructive criticism.

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 54 points 3 days ago

I fully expect them to say it's getting "review bombed" now, which is the current industry redefining of a term to make it come off as "It's not us, it's the stupid gamer's fault"

[-] dinckelman@lemmy.world 29 points 3 days ago

It's not a review bomb if it's fully deserved. If you make a bad product, you deserve a bad review, and maybe Bethesda should have thought about that ahead of time

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] HeavyRaptor@lemmy.zip 25 points 3 days ago

The difference is, there is no fixing Starfield, it is rotten to the core. You would have to re-do most of the story elements and writing, and the disjointed, empty world. On top of that you'd have to fix the bugs and technical limitations like the constant loading screens. At this point you would be throwing out most of the game and basically starting from scratch with a few systems done, like the ship building and possibly gunplay.

I think cyberpunk never became what many wanted, but if you let go of your expectations, it is a good game.

Funny thing is that shipbuilding also felt annoying to me. There were so many arbitrary restrictions that I felt like I couldn't actually make the ship I wanted, it always felt the same

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TommySoda@lemmy.world 44 points 3 days ago

Same with No Man's Sky. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but they buckled down and delivered on almost every promise that they failed on back at release. Not only that but every update since the game came out has been for free. Both No Man's Sky and Cyberpunk are fantastic games, and they were garbage on release. Bethesda has been doing the opposite approach and avoiding feedback from fans since Skyrim came out the first time.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 38 points 3 days ago

Cyberpunk was buggy, unoptimized, and kind of unfinished, but the fundamental game design was sound.

Starfield on the other hand is broken at its core. The Bethesda RPG experience just does not translate to the open worlds space map they built the game on. So they can't take the cyberpunk approach because they'd have to build an entirely different game from scratch.

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 26 points 3 days ago

I don't know why anyone decided that that engine was the right way to go. The number one thing that killed the game for me was the endless loading screens. Constantly. Whenever I started feeling immersed, a new loading screen would pop up and it ruined it for me. We have engines left and right that don't need to do this anymore, but starfield, the game that's trying to base itself to be a realistic exploration game, decided that endless loading screens were still the best way to go

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

even without the loading screens it would still be terrible. get a quest, go to your ship, take off, travel to other system, land, exit your ship, walk to destination, reverse all that to turn the quest in, rinse and repeat. it's just a tedious experience.

the best part of Bethesda games is just being able to wander around aimlessly in a pretty environment, likely stumbling upon little easter eggs or side quests along the way. none of that exists in Starfield.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[-] GhiLA@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago

Cool Bethesda, just dump the Gamebryo source code off to us before you get liquidated by Shittersoft since you're basically budgeted into making half-baked shit until you go bankrupt anyway.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 41 points 3 days ago
[-] Glytch@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

This was exactly my first thought. Not surprised that the pioneers of shitty dlc made shitty dlc.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago

Yeah...

Basically every Oblivion DLC that was not Shivering Isles (and MAYBE Heroes of The Nine or whatever) was god awful. And Fallout 3 (aside from the last two hours of the story DLC) was only really tolerated because it was mostly sold as a season pass. Operation Anchorage was a cool novelty that made stealth trivial and the rest... existed.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago

Microsoft really knows how to pick the winners, don't they?

[-] aluminium@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago

they are a reverse midas. Anything they touch doesn't turn into gold but into shit

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 26 points 2 days ago

Mierdas touch

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

They do ESO makes anything else the company does largely irrelevant. Same as Blizzard back when Activision bought them.

[-] Kraiden@kbin.earth 63 points 3 days ago

worst Bethesda DLC's released of all time

Are we including Horse Armor here?

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 47 points 3 days ago

Bethesda literally invented shitty DLC

[-] yamanii@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

They aimed at Far Harbor and arrived at The Pit, this was their chance, there's not even random content since it's all in the same planet, they just forgot they were doing a RPG and gave no meaningful choices, there are plenty of bad endings that just make you load a save lol.

[-] Makhno@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I liked the pit...

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 32 points 3 days ago

This makes me feel better about them being exclusive to Microsoft now. I’m not missing anything at all.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 44 points 3 days ago

Still better than Horse Armor. So no, not Bethesda's worst DLC.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 25 points 3 days ago

I've given up on every major developer/publisher, so-called AAA garbage, except for capcom for monster hunter and square enix for final fantasy. I'll be extra sad the day they too go the way of every other greedy lazy "AAA" game company...

At least indie devs care to make a good game and not try to make a money printing IP machine with some game like aspects in it.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] MarcomachtKuchen@feddit.org 29 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Hey im all for giving Bethesda shit for publishing an incredibly bland game, but 8 reviews hardly seem like a solid foundation to make that title.

EDIT : I've realised that autocorrect might have gotten you since around 1, 1k user reviews still sit at around 42% positive

[-] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 32 points 3 days ago

And it was something people were hoping would save the game. But, it's unfortunately more confirmation that Bethesda can no longer produce quality games.

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 22 points 3 days ago

Bethesda was obviously already toast to anyone paying attention when Fallout '76 came out. They certainly haven't improved since.

...And I can't believe that these are the motherfuckers who own the rights to Doom now.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] hal_5700X@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 days ago

I have no hope for The Elder Scrolls 6 and Fallout 5. It was a good run but like all things. Everything comes to an end.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
288 points (94.7% liked)

Games

32045 readers
1047 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS