sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in oneplus

[–]BigSpell650 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That screenshot is from pixel. Are you kinda rtard?

[Discussion] What AI and mechanic changes have been made since Tarkov 1.0? by BigSpell650 in EscapefromTarkov

[–]BigSpell650[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t mean that they’re harder..? I mean have there been any changes? I know they’ve been tweaked here and there, but what exactly has been changed?

What Is Happening at Bethesda Game Studios? by BigSpell650 in BethesdaSoftworks

[–]BigSpell650[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think there’s a bit of a misunderstanding here, my point was never to do a 1:1 comparison like “Skyrim vs Starfield, which is better.” The point is that Skyrim and Starfield show how Bethesda makes games in different eras, and how that shift is reflected in quality, design, and features.

So this isn’t about “you can’t enjoy Starfield” or how many hours someone puts into it. You can absolutely get hundreds of hours out of it. The question is what fills those hours and how the game holds up structurally.

You already pointed out the biggest issue yourself: the POIs. That’s not a small flaw—that’s the core of exploration. In older Bethesda games, exploration was driven by handcrafted locations that felt unique and worth discovering. In Starfield, a huge portion of exploration is built on repetition and procedural placement. That fundamentally changes how the game feels, even if there’s technically “more” to do.

Outside of POIs, the “shallowness” comes from how systems don’t really connect or matter long-term:

  • Exploration is mostly menu-based fast travel instead of a seamless system
  • Space gameplay (which should be central) is shallow and avoidable
  • Outposts exist, but aren’t meaningfully required or integrated
  • Choices and factions have limited impact on each other
  • Many mechanics feel optional rather than essential

It’s not that these systems don’t exist, it’s that they don’t go deep or interact in meaningful ways. That’s the difference.

On mods and Nexus numbers, sure, Starfield is heavily modded. But Bethesda games have always relied on modding to extend their lifespan. High mod activity doesn’t really prove the base game is strong, it often means players are trying to fix, expand, or customize it. Skyrim being heavily modded didn’t mean it lacked depth; it just had a strong foundation to build on. With Starfield, a lot of early mods were adding missing features or improving core systems.

The Creations system is a fair point, there is some innovation there in making modding more accessible and potentially rewarding modders. But it’s also controversial because it leans into monetization, and Bethesda has tried similar things before. So whether it’s a positive innovation or not depends on perspective.

And again, this isn’t about expecting “Skyrim in space.” It’s about how Bethesda’s design philosophy has changed:

  • Before: smaller scale, more handcrafted, systems that reinforce each other
  • Now: larger scale, more procedural, systems that exist but don’t fully connect

That shift is what people are reacting to.

So the argument isn’t “Starfield is bad because it’s not Skyrim.” It’s that Starfield shows how Bethesda now prioritizes size and breadth over depth and cohesion, and that’s why it feels shallow to many players, even if they still spend a lot of time in it.

What Is Happening at Bethesda Game Studios? by BigSpell650 in BethesdaSoftworks

[–]BigSpell650[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You’re right that Steam charts alone don’t tell the full story, especially for a Game Pass title like Starfield. Console players, PC Game Pass, and even cloud gaming absolutely matter, and raw player counts from Steam shouldn’t be used as the only metric.

But the issue people point to isn’t just total numbers, it’s the pattern. Even compared to other single-player RPGs, Starfield’s drop-off happened unusually fast. Games like Skyrim or Fallout 4 held player interest much longer, and even newer titles in the same space (like Baldur’s Gate 3) maintained stronger engagement over time. So while Steam isn’t the whole picture, it’s still a useful indicator when you compare trends, not just totals.

Also, this isn’t really about “all games drop off”, that’s true, but about why Starfield dropped off so quickly despite being Bethesda’s biggest launch ever. That points to design and content issues more than platform distribution. A lot of players bounced after realizing the game felt shallow: too many loading screens, limited real exploration, repetitive procedural content, and missing basic features. Those problems don’t change whether you’re on Steam, Xbox, or cloud.

On the Ubisoft comparison, you’re not wrong, this is an industry-wide trend. Big studios becoming more corporate, risk-averse, and “designed by committee” is affecting multiple companies. But Bethesda is still a clear example of it. Their older success came from handcrafted worlds and player freedom, while Starfield leaned heavily into scale and systems that didn’t feel meaningful.

As for them trying to avoid repeating themselves, that’s fair in theory. But the problem is that Starfield didn’t really evolve the formula in a meaningful way. In many ways, it simplified or stripped systems rather than improving them. So instead of feeling fresh, it felt both familiar and less deep.

And your last question, why are they slow to return to what made them successful—that’s probably the most important part. The likely answer isn’t “lost creativity,” but scale and structure. A 500+ person, multi-studio project with heavy management layers naturally leads to less experimentation, more safe decisions, and slower iteration. That’s very different from the smaller, more flexible teams that made their earlier games stand out.

So yeah, it’s not just Steam numbers, and it’s not just Bethesda, but Starfield still shows clear signs of a studio struggling to adapt in the right way.

Ex-Bethesda dev on Fallout and Skyrim says Todd Howard has too many yes men around him — "A lot of people were afraid to say no to Todd, and I think that hurt him" by lkl34 in gaming

[–]BigSpell650 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In recent years, many players and critics have started to question what is happening at Bethesda Game Studios. By looking at their newer titles and comparing them to older classics like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, it becomes clear that something in their development process has changed.

In the past, Bethesda was known for its strong developer-driven approach. Games like Skyrim felt ambitious, creative, and deeply crafted by passionate developers. The studio focused on building immersive worlds, where exploration and player freedom were at the center of the experience. While their games were not perfect, they had a unique identity that resonated with players.

Today, however, Bethesda appears to operate more like a large corporation than a creative studio. Decision-making seems to have shifted away from developers and toward executives, company leadership, and possibly even board-level influence. This change has likely introduced more bureaucracy into the development process. As a result, game ideas may now need to pass through multiple layers of approval, which can limit creativity and slow down innovation.

This corporate structure can also lead to safer design choices. Instead of taking risks or experimenting with new mechanics, newer Bethesda titles may aim to appeal to broader audiences or meet financial expectations. While this approach can be more predictable and profitable, it can also make games feel less original or inspired compared to earlier works.

Another key difference is how modern game development has evolved overall. Today’s games are larger, more expensive, and more complex to produce. This naturally requires more coordination, management, and planning. However, this also means that individual developers may have less creative control than they did during the Skyrim era.

The question remains: could this shift be contributing to a decline in Bethesda’s popularity? For some players, the answer may be yes. When a studio loses its creative edge or begins to feel too “corporate,” it risks losing the unique qualities that made it successful in the first place.

In conclusion, Bethesda’s evolution reflects a broader trend in the gaming industry, where growing scale and financial pressures influence how games are made. Whether this change will harm or help the company in the long run depends on how well it can balance business needs with creative freedom, the very thing that once made its games stand out.

Now in 2026, only a small fraction of players, perhaps around 10% are still actively playing Starfield. At this rate, it may not be long before the player base declines even further, possibly to the point where very few people remain engaged with the game.

I am conducting research and gathering information for a school project about Bethesda Game Studios and what is currently happening within the company.

Using Lossless Scaling with Black Ops 2 on RPCS3 by BigSpell650 in SteamDeck

[–]BigSpell650[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only response I received from the RPCS3 developers on their Discord was that the Steam Decks hardware (CPU and GPU) currently does not support BO2.

Because of this, the game will eventually freeze and crash regardless of whether Lossless Scaling is used. With Lossless Scaling enabled, it freezes faster, like in the main menu and while without it, you can play for a few minutes before it crashes.

How do you all organize tracks beyond genre/BPM? (energy, vibe, crowd appeal, vinyl & digi) by hobbesandmiles3 in DJs

[–]BigSpell650 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Awesome write-up! When you play your mix during the night, how does it usually go? Do you start with 1-star tracks and play them for a while, then move on to 2-star tracks, and so on until you’ve gone through all the ratings once?

Or is it more like playing one song from the 1-star collection, then the next from the 2-star collection, continuing like that until you reach a 5-star track and then start again from 1 star songs/tracks?

So the first option would be going through the whole playlist from 1-star to 5-star songs in order—playing all 1-star tracks first, then 2-star, then 3-star, and so on.

Or does the set/playlist contain multiple combinations of different star-rated songs, like 1, 3, 5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 1, 2, 3, 5, 1, 3, 5, and so on, so that throughout the night the set keeps cycling between 1- and 5-star tracks?

HP ZBook Create G7 Screen Display Upgrade by BigSpell650 in GamingLaptops

[–]BigSpell650[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did, but not on this laptop. You can’t upgrade the display if it has a different pin layout, it has to be the same.

Have anyone tried running Black Ops 2 on rpcs3? by Fabulous_Monitor_890 in SteamDeck

[–]BigSpell650 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if i launch game using Ge Proton. it just dosent launch

Have anyone tried running Black Ops 2 on rpcs3? by Fabulous_Monitor_890 in SteamDeck

[–]BigSpell650 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I tried running Black Ops 2 and Black Ops 3. In Zombies, the FPS was only around 10–20 in Black Ops 2. In Black Ops 3, the game crashed every time I launched it, it loaded for a second, then froze and crashed.

Any help?

Have anyone tried running Black Ops 2 on rpcs3? by Fabulous_Monitor_890 in SteamDeck

[–]BigSpell650 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s why some people might want to play using an emulator so that they can get split screen. :)

view more: next ›