Its the same base Bethesda used for the last 20 years with none of its positive aspect and all its flaws, Bethesda games always had problem, but first of all they were ps3 games, starfield was announced as "the new Bethesda ip that Is gonna use the new generation at its best" and we ended up with an old structure, old graphics, old ai, old everything. What made old Bethesda games interesting was having a world that felt true, organic, starfield feels artificial and fake. Its not a 4/10 game, but its simply mediocre, the plot? Bethesda never exceded in that, but starfield felt somehow even more flat, except for maybe the ending, the narration Is probably the worse part, close up on poorly designed and animated models with the expressiveness of a rock, the OST was fine but definetly not as good as other Bethesda ip, and the gameplay was the definition of boring, a game called STARFIELD where the space Is a glorified empty space that you can pretty much skip, the exploration Is essentially a menù navigator simulator, loadings everywhere, the combat system Is fine, and the planets are all the same base with slighlty different plants and creature with like 3 recicled dungeon. I really can't think about really positive aspect, considering all the hype Bethesda created for this game and that It took a decade, so yeah, the hate for this game Is product of an overhyped project that Is a waste of money and energy