I know I'm not the first one to comment on this - not even in this
newsgroup! - but it really struck me: seeing Bethesda's "Starfield" on
Steam going for $70 right next to "Baldur's Gate 3" at $60 shows how
out of touch triple-A publishers are.

I'm not sure I'd like "Baldur's Gate 3"; it's a top-down open-world
fantasy RPG that utilizes the 5E ruleset and has waaay too much magic
for my taste. But I'll happily trust all the rave reviews that
indicate that it is a quality game. It may not be the Second Coming of
RPGs that some make it out to be, but it definitely seems worth its
asking price.

I don't get anything like the same vibe from "Starfield". I generally
like Bethesda open-world RPGs, but they've become quite formulaic, and
the sheer scale of "Starfield" - 1000 planets - puts me off more than
it draws me in. From what little I've seen about the game, it looks
like that - with so vast a playing area - the universe can't help but
feel empty and generic. Bethesda's games were always poor in gameplay,
story and characters, but their worlds always were fun to explore.
"Starfield" doesn't look like it will have even that. And they want
$70 USD for that? And worse, that's just the base price; Bethesda has
confirmed there will be in-game purchases and microtransactions on top
of that (in addition, surely, to the usual 'seasonal passes' and
expansions to further drain the wallet)?

It's really hard to look at these two games and feel any attraction
for "Starfield"; "Baldur's Gate 3" feels like an old-school title
designed to trade a solid, entertaining experience for your cash,
while "Starfield" looks like a leech-like "live services" experience
whose primary goal isn't fun, but to drain your wallet. And it's
$10USD more right out the door.

"Starfield" could be great; it's not out yet, I haven't played it; I
don't know. But it's got a hard road ahead of it to convince me of its
worth.

It's on PCGamepass, just try it there.

rms

Am 22.08.23 um 22:24 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
> I know I'm not the first one to comment on this - not even in this
> newsgroup! - but it really struck me: seeing Bethesda's "Starfield" on
> Steam going for $70 right next to "Baldur's Gate 3" at $60 shows how
> out of touch triple-A publishers are.
Tell that to Sony, AAA publishers over here charge for a new PS5 game 80
Euros which is roughly 85-90 USD!
Funny thing is media based games on discs usually are cheaper because
they have to go against second hand media sales.
So much for online buying is cheaper because you cut out the middle man,
not on consoles!
Needless to say I have bought all of my PS5 games so far only on disc.
PS+ however is great, although it is basically just a rental service,
but just like on the xbox with live you can get a ton out of it just by
only paying the service and never buy any game. In the end it is
probably just cheaper to pay for the highest PS+ tier and call it a day,
all games end up there anyway after a while!

On Tue, 22 Aug 2023 16:24:49 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>I don't get anything like the same vibe from "Starfield". I generally
>like Bethesda open-world RPGs, but they've become quite formulaic, and
>the sheer scale of "Starfield" - 1000 planets - puts me off more than
>it draws me in. From what little I've seen about the game, it looks
>like that - with so vast a playing area - the universe can't help but
>feel empty and generic.

I always felt this way about Bethesda games going all the way back to
The first Elder Scrolls game.

Despite that, I am curious about this game. I will be paying attention
to the reviews on this one.

On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 1:25:00 PM UTC-7, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> I know I'm not the first one to comment on this - not even in this
> newsgroup! - but it really struck me: seeing Bethesda's "Starfield" on
> Steam going for $70 right next to "Baldur's Gate 3" at $60 shows how
> out of touch triple-A publishers are.
>
> I'm not sure I'd like "Baldur's Gate 3"; it's a top-down open-world
> fantasy RPG that utilizes the 5E ruleset and has waaay too much magic
> for my taste. But I'll happily trust all the rave reviews that
> indicate that it is a quality game. It may not be the Second Coming of
> RPGs that some make it out to be, but it definitely seems worth its
> asking price.

Well I bought it and am playing it now, I'm on like my 4th restart with
different characters to try things out. There's a lot of things that are a
bit irritating, but just a bit. The separate camera controls not staying
focused on your character (maybe something to do that) and click
movement are very antequated. Hovering cursor over everything to
see if you can interact with it or not (again maybe something to fix
that.) The slow turn based combat and 5e's tubthumping (getting
knocked out then getting up regularly) aren't great, but they're
still better even now that Wasteland 2 was.

But it's all minor annoyances that I seem to be getting accustomed to
rather quickly. There's a lot to explore and a lot of different results
possible. Even the prolog I've found things in each subsequent time
through it that I missed before. The NPCs and roleplaying results
are top notch and seem to have fairly immediate results.

>
> I don't get anything like the same vibe from "Starfield". I generally
> like Bethesda open-world RPGs, but they've become quite formulaic, and
> the sheer scale of "Starfield" - 1000 planets - puts me off more than
> it draws me in. From what little I've seen about the game, it looks
> like that - with so vast a playing area - the universe can't help but
> feel empty and generic. Bethesda's games were always poor in gameplay,
> story and characters, but their worlds always were fun to explore.
> "Starfield" doesn't look like it will have even that. And they want
> $70 USD for that? And worse, that's just the base price; Bethesda has
> confirmed there will be in-game purchases and microtransactions on top
> of that (in addition, surely, to the usual 'seasonal passes' and
> expansions to further drain the wallet)?
>
> It's really hard to look at these two games and feel any attraction
> for "Starfield"; "Baldur's Gate 3" feels like an old-school title
> designed to trade a solid, entertaining experience for your cash,
> while "Starfield" looks like a leech-like "live services" experience
> whose primary goal isn't fun, but to drain your wallet. And it's
> $10USD more right out the door.
>
> "Starfield" could be great; it's not out yet, I haven't played it; I
> don't know. But it's got a hard road ahead of it to convince me of its
> worth.

Yeah, well, Bethesda games were never a launch buy for me, Fallout 3
4 was within a short period and I don't regret either, but I had a much
much harder time getting past their bugs and their annoyances were
far worse, and I didn't even play '76 until a year or two, but that's more
because anything mmoish makes me warry right away and the
immediate reviews were bad. What little I've even heard about Starfield
seems to put it in the same or worse situation.

I also loved Outer Worlds which was pretty much a smaller Falout in
a space world setting by the makers of New Vegas, and I fear I'm going
to be severely disappointed in comparison by Bethesda's late comer to
something similar.

There's also a glut of games I want to play right now, so I'm not likely to
buy it anytime soon unless the reviews are even better than what BG3
has had.

- Justisaur

Am 24.08.23 um 00:53 schrieb Justisaur:
> I also loved Outer Worlds which was pretty much a smaller Falout in
> a space world setting by the makers of New Vegas, and I fear I'm going
> to be severely disappointed in comparison by Bethesda's late comer to
> something similar.
I could not get warm with outer worlds, it felt too generic for me,
there was literally nothing I had not seen a hundred times before and
often worse executed.
But YMMV it was overall a quite polished game, it just did not click
with me!

On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 3:53:37 PM UTC-7, Justisaur wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 1:25:00 PM UTC-7, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

> > I'm not sure I'd like "Baldur's Gate 3"; it's a top-down open-world
> > fantasy RPG that utilizes the 5E ruleset and has waaay too much magic
> > for my taste. But I'll happily trust all the rave reviews that
> > indicate that it is a quality game. It may not be the Second Coming of
> > RPGs that some make it out to be, but it definitely seems worth its
> > asking price.

> The separate camera controls not staying
> focused on your character (maybe something to do that) and click
> movement are very antiquated.

So double click on the character portrait and it follows them, until you
move the camera. I actually found this more annoying though as stuff
is frequently obscured.

> Hovering cursor over everything to
> see if you can interact with it or not (again maybe something to fix
> that.)

Hold alt. Seems like it doesn't show about half the containers that
have things like piles of books so still have to go hovering.

I'll add one, about the third rock I noticed that was highlighted I
still couldn't figure out what to to with, so I looked it up. You have
to drag them with the mouse. As far as I remember there was no
indication that this was the way to interact with anything in the
prolog or tutorial tips, so I'm not sure I would've ever figured that
out since it is a different way of interacting than they're showing
(double click or right click menu.)

I probably should've moved this to the BG3 thread...

There's something about this game that feels very familiar,
but I can't quite place it. Wasteland 2 maybe? I could swear
I've played fantasy games like this though.

- Justisaur

On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 06:19:15 -0700 (PDT), in
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, Justisaur wrote:

>On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 3:53:37?PM UTC-7, Justisaur wrote:
>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 1:25:00?PM UTC-7, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>> > I'm not sure I'd like "Baldur's Gate 3"; it's a top-down open-world
>> > fantasy RPG that utilizes the 5E ruleset and has waaay too much magic
>> > for my taste. But I'll happily trust all the rave reviews that
>> > indicate that it is a quality game. It may not be the Second Coming of
>> > RPGs that some make it out to be, but it definitely seems worth its
>> > asking price.
>
>> The separate camera controls not staying
>> focused on your character (maybe something to do that) and click
>> movement are very antiquated.
>
>So double click on the character portrait and it follows them, until you
>move the camera. I actually found this more annoying though as stuff
>is frequently obscured.
>
Check. Thank you.

>> Hovering cursor over everything to
>> see if you can interact with it or not (again maybe something to fix
>> that.)
>
>Hold alt. Seems like it doesn't show about half the containers that
>have things like piles of books so still have to go hovering.
>
Exactly. If it's not going to show all containers, it defeats the purpose
of even having a hotkey. Especially since things like books can be worth
serious coin. I figured out to loot the initial library on my second
playthrough of it, just by idly hovering and discovering these "hidden"
containers. And I just kept finding more piles the harder I worked. Is
the second half of the bookshelf lootable or is it only the whole
bookshelf. Cool! It's each section of shelves! Is it by each shelf? No.
It's only by section. Is that pile of rubbish looking stuff lootable
books? Yes! Hmm. What else could be lootable books? That candleabra? Does
it have books on it? No, it just lit up.

(Oblig Rick and Morty: Is this toothbrush a camera, Rick? Wait?! Is
everything a camera?!!)

And the big lootable chests it highlighted for me? A freaking cup and 15
gp. Those bookshelves? 200 gp worth of books, minimum. Plus interesting
lore. Lesson learned: Don't trust the interface. Ever.

So, I wouldn't mind so much if it didn't highlight individual items on a
table, like a wheel of cheese, but ffs if it's not going to highlight all
containers, then I'm basically back to not having a highlight key.

Not to mention that the alt key didn't highlight an unconscious, joinable
NPC in the beginning of the game and I missed her on first run-through.

It kinda feels like when they put the start button back into Windows 8.1.

>I'll add one, about the third rock I noticed that was highlighted I
>still couldn't figure out what to to with, so I looked it up. You have
>to drag them with the mouse. As far as I remember there was no
>indication that this was the way to interact with anything in the
>prolog or tutorial tips, so I'm not sure I would've ever figured that
>out since it is a different way of interacting than they're showing
>(double click or right click menu.)
>
You can't drag bodies of your kills though. Go figure. I tried. If
there's a different mechanism for that lmk. I figure it doesn't matter if
it's not built into the game, but BG3 is detailed and interesting enough
that it had me thinking about hiding my kills.

And it's inconsistent, which mildly grinds my gears. I don't want to pay
for a new clutch again.

>I probably should've moved this to the BG3 thread...
>
Ya think?! Done. ;^)

>There's something about this game that feels very familiar,
>but I can't quite place it. Wasteland 2 maybe? I could swear
>I've played fantasy games like this though.
>
Temple of Elemental evil comes to mind. The Pathfinder games too.

My biggest pet peeve? Why can't I select all my party members and press
"C" once to put them all in stealth mode. Where's the box drag select
that BG1 and 2 had the sense to include guys?

For that matter, why doesn't it just assume that when you press C, when
your joined party is selected, that you want everyone in stealth. Almost
any time I want an individual in stealth, I've separated him from the
party.

I assume there will be UI patches of these rough edges. Larian seems very
responsive and committed to a quality experience. If we ever get BG4, it
will be very much better from the get-go, just like BG2 was better than
1.

Playing BG1 in EasyTutu and having BG2's highlight container key makes
some of the pixel hunting puzzles (remember the knot in the tree?) much
easier. Hunting for a 4-pixel knot on a tree is not my idea of fun.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

Anyone wanting a new cpu & starfield, deal here:
on sale, free starfield copy https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BTZB7F88/

rms

rms <rsquiresMOO@MOOflashMOO.net> wrote:
>Anyone wanting a new cpu & starfield, deal here:
>on sale, free starfield copy https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BTZB7F88/

You can actually get a free copy of Starfield with a purchase of most
current AMD CPUs or video cards from any participating retailer:

https://www.amd.com/en/promotions/starfield-bundle

Note that only Amazon itself is considered a participating retailer,
the ofter doesn't apply to third party sellers on Amazon.

--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU
[oo][oo] rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
-()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca:11068/
db //

rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Ross Ridge) writes:

> You can actually get a free copy of Starfield with a purchase of most
> current AMD CPUs or video cards from any participating retailer:
>
> https://www.amd.com/en/promotions/starfield-bundle

Very cool, there are participating stores even up here. No AM4 CPUs
though and I'm not in the mood to update motherboard and RAM.