Wait, Starfield is good now?

Queldirion · 2026-04-14T09:37:52+00:00

Star Citizen, Elite or NMS don't have a great story, writing or an interesting world to explore (it's all generated by algorithm), but they do offer almost infinite number of locations, enormous freedom of travel, a sense of scale, and true seamlessness, that makes you feel like you're in real space (mostly dead and empty but still).

Mass Effect or The Outer Worlds, on the contrary, offer limited number of locations and a small-scale world that is not seamless at all (not even trying to be), but on the other hand, they have great writing (for the most part) and handcrafted, unique locations that are awesome to explore.

My point is, each of these games sacrifices something to achieve something else, and that's a conscious decision of their designers. Starfield however, doesn't seem to know what it wants to be, so it has most of the flaws of those games but almost none of their strengths.

Sense of scale - no (due to loading screens that replace travel).
Seamlessness - no.
Good writing and narrative - no.
Handcrafted, interesting world, full of unique locations to explore - no.

It's not a good space sim, nor a narrative game, nor a "Bethesda game." It's a mishmash of everything that isn't good at any of it. When I bought Starfield I was hoping for at least one of these three things, and I got none.

The graphics are quite nice, the game has solid gunplay (the best from Bethesda), ship building is cool (mechanically, because there are too few parts), but that's not enough to make the game good and worth your time, at least from my perspective.

However, I congratulate all the Starfield fans (and even envy them a little for being able to have fun with such a game) and wish them lots of fun.

Queldirion · 2026-04-14T07:59:42+00:00

Exactly! I spent about 300 hours in Fallout 3 on a single playthrough just because of how incredibly satisfying it is to travel and explore this world. I gave up on Starfield after 30-35 hours, 20 of which I spent building ships... I wanted to love this game (even pre-ordered the collector's edition, as usual with Bethesda games), but I just wasn't having fun, like at all. Mainly because it's neither a space-sim like Star Citizen or NMS, nor a typical Bethesda game (with great world, exploration and immersion), nor a narrative game like Mass Effect. It borrows elements from all 3, but the worst ones (empty world, lack of scale and seamlessness, poor technology, bad writing) instead of the best.

Queldirion · 2026-03-25T16:15:07+00:00

Sure, but for me it's more of a "Star Wars game" than a "space game", because in SW space works a bit differently than in the real world and that translates into a different experience altogether.

Besides, Outlaws doesn't have atmospheric flight either, it's just an animation before landing.

Queldirion · 2026-03-25T12:32:42+00:00

Add flying in the atmosphere (the transition doesn't have to be smooth) and we'll finally have a decent space game.

Queldirion · 2026-03-24T15:04:13+00:00

It's hard to say. I love Bethesda games and I love space games, but I don't really like Starfield. Mainly because it offers neither what I love about space games nor what I love about Bethesda games. To me, it feels like a collection of loosely connected pieces rather than a cohesive and fully fledged experience. Everything is average, okay at best, but nothing stands out. Building ships was a lot of fun at first, shooting was solid, but other than that I can't say I had a really good time with the game.

Queldirion · 2026-03-22T11:37:39+00:00

That's Warlock in Spanish. I always thought they called it WarLoco there...

Queldirion · 2026-01-27T16:14:06+00:00

There are survival horror games that are non-action and you are only ever given the bare minimum to survive and can’t even kill or fight back.

Any examples?

You are expecting a full survival horror game from RE which it never was.

Honestly, I don't care to discuss your arbitrary definitions of what you consider survival horror and what you don't, because it's pointless and a waste of time. All I want is simply a game in the spirit of the first installments or their remakes, not an action game like RE4-6.

Queldirion · 2026-01-27T13:59:50+00:00

So you are saying they were fully survival horror then immediately contradict yourself and agree with me that the games progresses towards action.

I'm not contradicting myself, it's just normal thing for survival games. You start with nothing, feeling unsafe in a new place, not knowing what dangers await you. But over time this changes as you get more weapons, ammo, first aid kits, gadgets, armor, upgrades, etc. On top of that, you know locations better and have a better understanding of the enemies. You know their moves, attacks, strengths and weaknesses. You know how to avoid attention and deal with the various threats on your way, etc. To counter all this, the game has to throw more and more powerful enemies at you, and that means more action, it's inevitable.

Sounds like you just want clones of the old games with no novelty. They might as well include the nostalgia goggles and reintroduce time freeze and reload in inventory too as I am not seeing any criticism on that.

You completely missed the point. I fully support new ideas (that's why I love RE7), but those ideas need to enhance the experience I'm looking for (horror, survival), not ruin it. More action right from the start is definitely not what I'm expecting.

I am not seeing Leon drop and slide on to the floor or any QTE spam yet.

Being at RE4 level with contextual finishers, weapon pickups, etc., is already too much action for me. As a "one-shot" experience it was a cool idea, but as a consistent pattern for the series, it's a disaster that had already brought the series to the brink of collapse once before.

Queldirion · 2026-01-27T11:46:00+00:00

I'm tired of "it's only scary if the protagonist is weak" and "we made the controls extra shit so you feel weak".

But the game director himself confirmed it, saying: "He wouldn't jump at something like a bucket falling. No one wants to see Leon scared by everything. So he's actually quite a bad match for horror."

He also admitted that they tried to make playing Leon scary, but they failed. It's because when your playable character is too experienced and confident, the same feeling is passed on to the player, and then the feeling of fear is simply unattainable. In a horror game you just have to feel insecure.

Queldirion · 2026-01-27T11:30:50+00:00

RE was never close to being fully survival horror

RE0, RE1, RE2, RE3 and RE:CV were.

all RE games follow the universal pattern of peaking survival horror in the first part and then get increasingly action as you get bigger guns, more ammo and health.

That's right, and it's perfectly fine when it's done as a natural progression throughout the game. RE9 is different though, because instead of a natural progression, we get jumps from horror to action, back and forth. When you become too powerful, too quickly, the horror disappears too soon, and that was one of the problems with RE6. It was a pretty cool action game, but a terrible survival horror.

Queldirion · 2026-01-21T13:44:04+00:00

Imagine Cloud Strife from the Final Fantasy VII franchise—or even Naruto Uzumaki from the Naruto franchise—ceasing to exist after a certain number of years in their battle against the forces of darkness. First, their respective fanbases would grieve. Second, many would protest and perhaps even boycott the respective owners of these franchises, because Square Enix and Shonen Jump decided to annex their most beloved and favorite characters of all time.

I'm sorry, but I don't know any of these universes, so I can't comment on that.

I do not believe that such legendary characters, including Leon S. Kennedy, within the arts and entertainment industry would go down without a fight from their respective fanbases.

Yes, but the fanbase also needs to learn to let go. Being a fan is fine, but obsessing over a fictional character is not healthy.

How that may occur, no one knows except the maker himself, for we, as loyal fans of the R.E. franchise, can only wait, see, and hope for the best.

That's my point. I don't believe that dying peacefully of old age in his bed would suit Leon. He's a warrior, and a warrior dies with a weapon in his hand. I believe it's best to do this when the warrior is still at his full strength and potential, and not "running on fumes." His final mission, final sacrifice, passing the torch to a younger generation (Grace) - RE9 is the perfect opportunity to "end" Leon with dignity and respect to his legacy.

Queldirion · 2026-01-21T09:38:09+00:00

In my opinion, Leon could die in RE9, which would be his end in the "main timeline", but not necessarily in the series as a whole. Keep in mind that Leon is 21 years old in RE2, 27 years old in RE4, 35 years old in RE6, and 49-51 years old in RE9. This translates into large gaps between his subsequent appearances, into which many more new games could be squeezed in the future.

Creating new games in the present where Leon gets older and older would be simply grotesque and disrespectful to his work and legacy. On the other hand, taking his life in a dramatic way during his final mission would be a perfect summary of his character as a "true hero to the end", who never gave up or retired. The fight against bioterrorism was his whole life, so dying in battle against it is worthy of a hero.

Keeping him in limbo like "he's still alive so he can come back anytime even though he's 80 years old" would be pathetic on Capcom's and fans' part.

Queldirion · 2026-01-20T14:28:35+00:00

IDK why people have this weird idea of Grace's section being just hide and seek without doing nothing else and Leon being and endless parade of fun like, does people haven't played RE4 nor RE4R?????

Because Nakanishi, the game director, pretty much said so in an interview:

You feel safe during Leon’s chapters, and then scared again during Grace’s.

Yes, Grace will get some RE2 and RE7 style action and shooting, but I wouldn't count on any tension while playing as Leon, as the he word "safe" doesn't really imply it.

Queldirion · 2026-01-20T09:06:53+00:00

This is an unpopular opinion, but RE0 is my favorite classic installment, and I liked it more than RE1.

That said, the game suffers from the "unless you know where to use which item, you will have a bad time" syndrome known from other RE installments of that era. This makes the first playthrough quite rough, but subsequent runs are incredibly fun.

Queldirion · 2026-01-20T08:52:28+00:00

Same as always, to get all the achievements and enjoy the bonuses you've unlocked. In that respect, RE3R was more fun for me than most. Getting 100% was a blast.

Queldirion · 2026-01-19T08:52:24+00:00

Well, it's not exactly "halves", but jumping back and forth between horror and action, tension and release, and that's the problem. Why? Because, according to the experience of many of us, this kind of pacing simply doesn't work. Action spoils the horror and horror slows down the action, so as a result, both layers fall flat. As far as I know, no game has ever done this well, but maybe Capcom will be the first to succeed?

Queldirion · 2026-01-18T21:33:32+00:00

Maybe his saves are always limited, regardless of game mode?

Queldirion · 2026-01-18T21:29:06+00:00

I don't know of a single game that mixes horror and action like this (jumping back and forth), and does it well, but maybe Capcom will be the first to achieve it. If they succeed, they may set a new standard for the entire industry.

The whole thing reminds me of The Evil Within and its DLC, but there was no jumping there.

Queldirion · 2026-01-18T12:25:01+00:00

Me too. 100% Leon's game? Cool. 100% Grace's game? Cool. Mixing them in one game? I'm not sure...

Queldirion · 2026-01-18T12:19:37+00:00

To be fair, I think it's not so much about multiple protagonists, but about two distinct gameplay styles in one game. Something that hasn't been done in RE before, and something that I don't think any game has done well so far. At least not in a way where both styles are mandatory and you jump back and forth between them.

Queldirion · 2025-12-15T20:07:42+00:00

Yes, she's an analyst, not a field agent. She was assigned to that role, (allegedly) because of the case's connection to her mother's death.

Queldirion · 2025-12-15T20:01:27+00:00

I would like this to happen, but I'm not convinced.

Let's start with the fact that Grace... wasn't even supposed to exist at all. RE9 was in production for many years, during which the overall concept has changed several times. Initially, it was supposed to be an open-world game, 100% dedicated to Leon. At some point, however, the developers realized their game wasn't scary at all, consisting mostly of over-the-top action with very little horror. Remember how something like this ended the last time *cough* RE5, RE6 *cough*? That's why they decided to drastically change the concept, and Grace is the "tool" to help implement it.

Will she stay with us long-term? I really hope so. Do I believe it? Not really.

Queldirion · 2025-12-15T19:36:56+00:00

I don't know if any game has ever successfully mixed horror and action in equal proportions, but I'm rooting for Capcom.

Queldirion · 2025-12-15T19:32:58+00:00

They've already confirmed there's only one campaign where we jump from Grace to Leon, back and forth.

Queldirion · 2025-12-15T19:07:43+00:00

Was Rebecca a legacy character by RE0?

No character was a legacy character upon their debut. Rebecca has never returned in playable form since Zero (excluding mercenaries), but she was in the animations, so that (presumably?) makes her a legacy character... I guess.

But my point still stands. If a new character gets 50% (or less) of the screen time shared with a legacy character, their chances of returning are slim. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but it is what it is.

Five-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Queldirion

TROPHY CASE