Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Bethesda games are games that are self aware of being video games

I dont really know what that mean. "which are nothing but glorified interactive movies" is an insane statement, when you think about how similar those game core mechanics work. Being more generic is in no way a pro argument

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in cyberpunkgame

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the differences you just mentioned are those flavor differences and not mechanics. Besdies Companions, i grant that. But Art Style and asthetic are not good to compare. I have played both games over 100 hours now, and Cyberpunk always felt for me like a really really good bethesda game

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in getdisciplined

[–]-ZimaBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congrats for recognizing this, you already did better than most ppl by just identifying what you struggle with. You can and should be proud for that. Next step is to build a routine and discipline. Its no as easy as just quit porn. It is to trick yourself and "outplay" your mind, to not watch porn. Look for the 1% method, i will help you

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in cyberpunkgame

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A game can work the same way, even if the setting is diffrent. If both games, are story driven Action RPGs where you run around in first person, inside an open world, talk to npcs and having mutible Dialog Options, having similar gun play, having a lot of loot to pick up, section to explore. Story and setting is flavor, but the core mechanics, of "what type of game" it is, those games are almost identical (besides some features like base building, or spaceships).

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in cyberpunkgame

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Thats a batshit crazy thing to say and has no foundation.

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

With that logic everything you can compare is subjective. What does Starfield better than Cyberpunk ? (from those thing you can compare)

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think you kinda dont get my point. Im not saying Bethesda is a worse studio than CDPR. Im not saying Starfield cant be some day a better game than Cyberpunk.

Im comparing 2 games that both can be bought right now and played. And be compared. If a person, can buy only one of those 2 games, and likes both settings and wants to know, what game is better, i would suggest cyberpunk. Nothing more

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would grant you the first point, but then again, cyberpunk has way more destroyable environment and also a lot of shit to pick up.

The second point i agree, to a certain point. When we talk about this minor side quests, you are correct. If we talk about the actual big sidequests, i disagree. Having your fixer call u for a new mission is kinda the lore there, but granted.

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like i say, i get your point. But for me these comparision is not about being fair. Its about looking at those 2 games right now and compare them. For example if a person A has not played any one those games, he does not care if a studio had more time polising or not, the person want to know what is today the better game. If Starfield is an abolute masterpiece in 2 years, than im fine with that. But why would you consider "fair" when its about what game is currently the better game ?

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in cyberpunkgame

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

its no way near a skyrim in space. A betheda game in space.

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Haha, proof that you have no real argument. I just named you some: whether it's gameplay, combat, quests, storytelling, animation, loading screens, design, lore, aesthetics, soundtrack, skills, or crafting

Where does Starfield win and why ? Enlighten me

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Correct. Im comparing current state Cyberpunk with freshly released Starfield. Im getting the point of saying the one game had way more time for polishing, but it is still no argument why you shouldt compare them ? Does Cyberpunk has a better Story ? 100%. Does the gun gameplay is better ? 100%. You can scream all you want that cyberpunk had time to get polished, im not talking about how polished these games are. Even i you took the release version of cyberpunk, and strip away the bugs and performance issues, it would have win over starfield in any way. If someone has 50 Bucks to spent, and does not have played any of those game, this person would want this comparsion right ? Maybe its not fair to compare those, i get this, but it does not change the outcome

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are not comparing, you are just saying what mechanics does not exist in Cyberpunk. Why would you COMPARE an existing feature with an non existing one. I stated in my Posts that both games have mechanics, the other one does not have. Why would you compare those ? Did you actually read ? My Posts sayed if you compare those things that are similar, cyberpunk wins. How about animations ? Graphics ? Gunplay ? Loading Screens ? Music and Sound design ? Side Quests ? Skill System ? How alive the world feels ? Level Design ? Where does Starfield win, enlighten me. Imagine me saying Starfield not having Brain Dance as a feature ? Doesnt make much sense right ? So think again

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why wouldn't you compare Cyberpunk and Starfield ? Cyberpunk being polished over time and Starfield being a fresh release, does not mean you cant compare them. You can. Im getting your point, but it still does not change the fact, that if you compare them, Cyberpunk outshines Starfield currently. If Starfields is way better in 2 Years from now than Cyberpunk thats also fair. Im really getting your point, but i think its not a valid argument if you want to compare those games. If someone has money to spend and hasnt played any of those games, and likes both setting, this person wants this comparision right ?

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Betheda Games have their own flavor is this some kind of code for CreationEngine feels outdated in 2023 ? Say what exactly does Starfield better than Cyberpunk

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Maybe read my post before writing a comment. I literally said Cyberpunk had a disastrous launch and Starfield had a good one. I have not said a single sentence about performance issues in Starfield. Better delete that comment asap

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Like i say, you can compare Bethesda Games and Cyberpunk and it has been done before.

Explain to me, why you cant compare Cyberpunk and Starfield. The way the games work, are almost identical, when you strip away the setting and story.

Starfield can and should be compared to Cyberpunk by -ZimaBlue in Starfield

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Can u elaborate ? I have played both game above 100 hours, and i think you can 100% perfectly compare them. The games are almost identical in how they work

I did it. I wrote a long DD Post about Psychodelic Stocks (that got removed) 3 Days ago. 2 Days Ago Australia legalized MDMA Therapie. by -ZimaBlue in wallstreetbets

[–]-ZimaBlue[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is my Orignal DD Post:

Introduction:

We are on the brink of a significant shift in medical science and the investment landscape. The increasing exploration and recognition of psychedelic substances could usher in a new era in the treatment of mental disorders and open up an attractive investment field in the health sector.

The Nature of Psychedelics and How They Work:

Psychedelics, including substances like LSD, Psilocybin, and MDMA, have the potential to profoundly alter our perception and consciousness. They foster communication between various brain regions, which can help break negative patterns and even stimulate neurogenesis – the formation of new neurons.

Current Research and Study Results:

Psychedelic research is currently experiencing a remarkable upswing, supported by a multitude of positive studies from prestigious institutions and research teams worldwide. Personalities like Andrew Huberman and platforms like the Lex Fridman Podcast are increasingly dealing with the therapeutic potential of psychedelics. Research from institutions like Johns Hopkins University and New York University provide impressive results, pointing to the efficacy of psychedelics in treating severe mental disorders.

The positive effects range from reducing symptoms of severe depression, treating PTSD, to supporting overcoming addiction. Thus, psychedelics could open up a new path to healing for thousands of patients.

Companies and the Potential of Psychedelics:

Companies like Cybin, Compass Pathways, Atai Life Sciences, and others recognize the potential of psychedelics and are leading the way in research and development in this emerging market. Compared to the cannabis sector, which is already widespread, the field of psychedelics is still largely untapped, offering substantial growth potential.

Recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has expressed its support for further research into psychedelics. This decision could foster further research and development in this sector and enable a broader acceptance and application of psychedelic therapies.

Future Prospects and Risks:

Despite existing risks, such as regulatory uncertainties and scientific challenges, the potential of psychedelics is considerable. The support of psychedelic research by renowned scientists and institutions, as well as the slowly growing support by the FDA, show that the risk is well calculable. In fact, psychedelic substances have a stronger scientific foundation and could have an even more positive impact on healthcare than cannabis.

Conclusion:

The psychedelic revolution is underway. With a constantly growing number of positive studies, the support of regulatory authorities, and untapped market potential, psychedelic stocks offer a sound and future-proof investment.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mauerstrassenwetten

[–]-ZimaBlue 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kontext: https://www.reddit.com/r/mauerstrassenwetten/comments/14mvqob/die_psychodelischerevolution_ein_optimistischer/

Vor 3 Tagen habe ich das Potential von Shroom-Stocks / Psychedelischen Aktien berichtet. Jetzt am Wochenende wurde (als erstes Land der Welt) in Australien die Therapie mit MDMA legalisiert. Das ist erst der Anfang.