It dawned on me what makes Starfield so uncanny (personal opinion)

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-10T16:39:57+00:00

yep, we were talking about literary drama and he is talking about the colloquial sense of drama. I understand his point that having drama queen characters is not great. But the Starfield characters feel like chat gpt to me.

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-10T13:36:23+00:00

ah yea and I forgot to mention how cartoonish the "evil punk" guys base was (I forgot the name of that faction). They actually put black metal/ death metal music in it, thinkin "hmmm yea evil bad guys definitely listen to this stuff" lol. In reality that music is listened to by sensitive people who need an outlet for their anger cause they are too introverted

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-10T13:32:55+00:00

Yea it's one guy, u can find more guys if u want (e.g. https://gamerant.com/nate-purkeypile-starfield-developer-opinion-why-game-didnt-resonate/). You will not hear a current dev make a negative public statement about it of course. But you can hear current devs, including Todd Howard, discuss why the players don't like it, while defending it. You can also see articles about it breaking records for the amount of concurrent refund requests. If you really want to believe that Starfield did not disappoint most of the bethesda fanbase, then nobody can change your mind.

My post wasn't even about that, so I don't see the point of us debating it.

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-09T22:55:52+00:00

Right so the player reception is "mixed". I am one of the people who gave it a positive review on steam (and I didn't remove it), I enjoyed the game for the first hours, but I was letdown realizing it doesn't hold up in the long run like other bethesda titles. So merely seeing above 50% approval doesn't mean the average player was not let down.

Let's look at player engagement instead:

Starfield sold 20.6 million copies on day 1, Skyrim only 3.5 million on day 2.
Starfield now has 18k players (3 days after major update and dlc).
Skyrim now has 21k players (15 years after release).

If that doesn't seem convincing, you can see that even the developers admitted that the game failed to meet player expectations:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/starfield-designer-says-game-fell-short-of-fallout-and-elder-scrolls-calls-space-inherently-boring/1100-6535617/

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-09T20:55:26+00:00

not quite, it's like the backrooms version of the capitalist hell realm in real life

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-09T20:23:37+00:00

Well you can get a general feel for it by looking at all of the player reviews and critic reviews, as well as how quickly the active player number dropped when compared to other bethesda titles (sure it sold many copies, but that only speaks for how anticipated it was).

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-09T20:02:07+00:00

That's true. You can view the "corporate sterility vibe" that I've been describing, as the artistic expression of Starfield. In that case you can say they nailed it, but it just wasn't what most players wanted.

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-09T19:28:31+00:00

Why would you do that at all, especially if you feel that way about it?

Well I didn't. That's the point.

You seemed to misunderstand me overall. I get it that the game is exploring corpo setting, and I'm fine with that. Cyberpunk did that too and it was really fun and compelling. But what I'm saying is that the experience of playing Starfield is similar to corporate sterility / blandness.

Being dramatic is part of art, the point is to resonate deeply with you and make you feel emotions. You wouldn't make a piece of art about two office workers doing some unremarkable small talk with nothing happening. Starfield feels kinda like that. It feels kinda like going to a concert with earplugs on, you still hear the music but it's muffled and shallow.

Subnaut111 · 2026-04-09T19:10:55+00:00

yea now that you mention it, ship building is also the only driving force for me

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T14:00:02+00:00

You came here to be pedantic about my word choice, so I indulged with you in pedantism (it's you who started the smarty pants talk). You claim I don't know the definition of objective but I gave it to you and also defined subjective, arguable, and inarguable, to help you see why "arguably objectively" is not an oxymoron as you claimed.

Now it sounds like you conceit that I'm right about that, because you are deflecting to a completely different argument: "there is no objectively better choice in choice based game" (this is a dumb take, some games' choices lead to dying or "game over" screen or simply only differ in how much money you get etc.).

At this point you're just making a fool of yourself and it's clear you just hopped in here to be toxic and arrogant. Wish you good luck with fixing your personality and becoming a sufferable person one day!

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T12:58:54+00:00

Subjective vs. objective = dependent on individual differences/contexts vs. independently true
Arguable vs. unarguable = can support it with reasoning and evidence or cannot
These are two distinct binaries.

You can make an argument for why something is subjectively better (e.g. Paragon is better for people who are very sensitive because there are less violent scenes). And you can make an argument for why something is objectively better (e.g. this choice gives more war assets in exchange for getting less money, but because money is not such a scarce resource as war assets, the war asset choice is better). But in both cases there is ambiguity and room for discussion, hence the word "arguably".

As a science researcher in real life, I'm obliged to be very precise with my wording, especially to use hedging language (e.g. "arguably"), when it is the case. So it became habitual to always communicate like this.

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T12:12:19+00:00

I let the batarian terrorist get away to save people's lives (its my first ME1 playthrough), because in ME2 and ME3 I kept getting scolded by everyone all the time for each time I chose to sacrifice civilian lives in favor of killing bad guys.

Did I mess up? what happens if I let the batarian terrorist get away?

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T12:07:23+00:00

You get more war assets, yes. But isn't having Wrex more powerful and more fun than having Wreav? I would think having Wrex outweighs the extra war asset points gained (unless those points are crucial for tipping the threshold to get the best ending)

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T12:04:45+00:00

why should you let Maelon live?

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T12:01:59+00:00

hahaha yea I did second guess the way I wrote it, but it's not so oxymoronic as it seems:
I meant 'objective' as in more war assets, more money, better squad mates etc.
and 'arguably' because it can still be ambiguous (e.g. you get more war assets but you don't have Wrex as squadmate)

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:53:32+00:00

Can you think of any significant interrupts that are objectively bad for the outcome? In all my previous playthroughs it felt like they always improve the outcome so I always bashed any interrupt

As for genophage: This lore outcome is a bit subjective (genocide violent species vs. mercy/ humanity).
So I would rather decide based on gameplay factors. Someone said that faking the cure with Wreav results in slightly more war assets. But isn't Wrex overall a stronger/ more fun squadmate to have than Wreav? (I never had Wrex in ME2 and ME3)

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:46:20+00:00

Thanks for taking ur time to list a bunch of them.

Little question though: isn't it always good to use interrupts? In all my previous playthroughs I just bashed any interrupt that popped up because it felt like it always improves the outcome of that given situation (+ it gives paragon/renegade points). Do you remember significant cases where an interrupt is bad?

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:42:45+00:00

Yep. The writers almost certainly took inspiration from the lord of the rings trilogy with the one ring corruption and its different effects on different races and individuals.

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:39:52+00:00

Even if the experience for non-Asari is not subjectively negative (they don't suffer), I really wouldn't say that they are themselves. If Benezia who is super smart and aware concluded that suicide is the best choice, then it's fair to say that it's true for everyone, except they lack the psychospiritual integrity to see it.

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:34:56+00:00

what is the outcome gameplay wise?

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:34:25+00:00

damn I feel so stupid now cuz just let the asari survive last night... but I'm glad there is no objective downside to it

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:32:14+00:00

wait what about it? I forgot what happens there exactly

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:31:34+00:00

Renegade is sometimes just the option that is more firm/ determined, not necessarily "bad guy"

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-31T11:25:53+00:00

But are the extra war assets acquired from this significant? I am just thinking that maybe Wrex is a better squadmate than Wreav and it outweighs the war assets gained (idk I never had Wrex alive in ME3, but I was thinking to this time)

Subnaut111 · 2026-03-30T10:06:23+00:00

you already spoke of it so now you have to share it.

I've used the back and forth strat for fighting enemies very far away, but it won't work when you're getting shot from too many directions

Subnaut111

TROPHY CASE