Microsoft Starfield - Information Thread, update: May Update (detailed surface maps, difficulty options, display settings) to release on May 15

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Eurogamer and Starfield

WWW.EUROGAMER.NET

---

Just two days away from Starfield's review embargo, Eurogamer is still to receive a copy of the game from Bethesda. No …

 

Quote

Just two days away from Starfield's review embargo, Eurogamer is still to receive a copy of the game from Bethesda.

 

No publisher is obligated to provide a copy of their game to us, but it is important we are able to be transparent with you, our readers, about the delay this will have on the Eurogamer coverage you expect, especially as it has become clear that copies of the game are abundant elsewhere, and in particular in the US.

 

Access to the game appears to have been heavily restricted in the UK, where Bethesda has also not provided copies of Starfield to other websites and YouTube channels owned by Eurogamer parent company Reedpop. Meanwhile, some other UK outlets have been provided access through Bethesda's US arm.

 

Quote

Lastly, a note on Digital Foundry. You should expect to see relatively prompt coverage of the game by Rich and his team after a separate delivery of Starfield code was provided to them. However, this was provided alongside instruction to me by Bethesda that no other parts of Eurogamer were granted access. This was an unprecedented request, but one I ultimately felt compelled to honour to ensure the access granted to Digital Foundry was not subsequently impacted by any other mandate.

 

This means that Rock Paper Shotgun didn't receive a review code as that site is also owned by Reedpop.

 

[Mr.Vic20]

Hmmm, feels like MS is giving the UK the cold shoulder for SOME REASON... 

[ShreddieMercury]

AAA video game criticism doesn't exist.  It's all marketing because gamers can't read.

 

The hullabaloo around this game is hilarious.  It's quite the inflection point for the console wars and it's glorious to behold.

 

 

[Keyser_Soze]

39 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

This means that Rock Paper Shotgun didn't receive a review code as that site is also owned by Reedpop.

 

37 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

Hmmm, feels like MS is giving the UK the cold shoulder for SOME REASON... 

 

But odd they would give it to the department that would tear the game apart performance wise. They must be very confident about this one. 🤔

[Mr.Vic20]

1 minute ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

 

But odd they would give it to the department that would tear the game apart performance wise. They must be very confident about this one. 🤔

I find that hard to believe! Anything is possible, just not this! 

[Bacon]

EU

more like

PU

[ShreddieMercury]

Starfield is in a very unfortunate spot.  If Microsoft had better handled the last generation and the start of this one in terms of first party output, there wouldn't be half as much riding on this game as there is now.  Given that it's Xbox's first high profile exclusive since the tremendously disappointing Halo Infinite, and that the corporate drama in between these releases has been astronomical, expectations are out of control and there is no way to meet them, no matter how good the game is.  I'm guessing that this will end up being a very good, bordering on great game in the typical Bethesda mold, but given everything up to now, its fate is to be an extreme flashpoint in the inane world of modern gaming discourse.

[Kal-El814]

47 minutes ago, ShreddieMercury said:

AAA video game criticism doesn't exist.  It's all marketing because gamers can't read.

 

It exists to an extent, just rarely at mainstream outlets.

 

Besides, whenever one of the bigs publishes something that even has a whiff of "think piece" about it they immediately get dragged for "bringing politics into games" or some other such nonsense. If it's not grist for the hype mill, the market for it is small. We see that here, even, when someone like Polygon writes something about representation in games and people cop to not reading or say that the whole outlet has "an agenda."

 

 

[ShreddieMercury]

12 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

It exists to an extent, just rarely at mainstream outlets.

 

Besides, whenever one of the bigs publishes something that even has a whiff of "think piece" about it they immediately get dragged for "bringing politics into games" or some other such nonsense. If it's not grist for the hype mill, the market for it is small. We see that here, even, when someone like Polygon writes something about representation in games and people cop to not reading or say that the whole outlet has "an agenda."

 

 

 

True, but I also think that the problem is that games are so layered that it's a tall task to evaluate them in total, and too much is still misunderstood about them.  Some outlets are desperate to attach some grander meaning or theme to games (Waypoint was very guilty of this) while ignoring things that don't serve that purpose, and they only tackle games from this one specific angle.  Are we reviewing the story only?  The technical performance?  The (often unintentional) political implications?  God forbid, the gameplay?  I don't envy anybody covering games at this stage, because more than ever they deserve the type of nuance and critical thought that their general audience is either dismissive or outright hostile toward.

[Keyser_Soze]

34 minutes ago, ShreddieMercury said:

Given that it's Xbox's first high profile exclusive since the tremendously disappointing Redfall

 

 

Fixed

[Kal-El814]

1 hour ago, ShreddieMercury said:

 

True, but I also think that the problem is that games are so layered that it's a tall task to evaluate them in total, and too much is still misunderstood about them.  Some outlets are desperate to attach some grander meaning or theme to games (Waypoint was very guilty of this) while ignoring things that don't serve that purpose, and they only tackle games from this one specific angle.  Are we reviewing the story only?  The technical performance?  The (often unintentional) political implications?  God forbid, the gameplay?  I don't envy anybody covering games at this stage, because more than ever they deserve the type of nuance and critical thought that their general audience is either dismissive or outright hostile toward.

 

I don't think games are more layered than other works of art or literature, many of which have been the subject of critical analysis for decades or centuries. Even if we assume that's true, there is plenty of focused criticism that doesn't endeavor to look at the totality of a body of work and zooms in on a specific setting, character, or motif. When places do that, again, gamers inevitably pivot to the, "you said you like waffles, clearly you've neglected pancakes," perspective despite it being perfectly okay for someone to JUST talk about the gaming equivalent of waffles. I could go on but while I think gaming is unique because of its interactive nature I don't think it's that way to the extent to invalidate traditional critical analysis.

 

Besides I think it's vitally important to talk about the "often unintentional" political implications. Implicit biases, specific ethnocentric perspectives, etc.,  SHOULD be challenged or at the very least be called out. It says something when gamers get bent out of shape when people of color show up in Eurocentric fantasy settings but not when potatoes and tomatoes are all over the place. It says something that space exploration games often imply or overtly state that entire planets or star systems exist solely for obviously Western styled space programs to colonize, conquer, and plunder. That indigenous lifeforms mainly exist to slaughter for crafting resources or as a barrier to civilization.

 

I play and enjoy plenty of games like this, but the default gamer response to a lot of this criticism is that, "games need conflict," which is telling that we often see shooting people in the face or taking their land and resources as the "default" ways to make conflict. That SHOULD be looked at.

 

[Spork3245]

ITT people who forgot that Redfall is a AAA game

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Update:

 

Quote

 

An hour after the publication of this blog, Eurogamer was provided Starfield review code by Bethesda. 

 

As stated previously, our review will not be completed before embargo - but we can now begin our work to provide you with Eurogamer's judgement of the game.

 

 

[Ominous]

16 hours ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

PC graphics settings:

 

Can we do away with some settings having high and some having ultra or whatever? At least there are arrows here so you know it's the highest setting, but not all games do that. 

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

4 minutes ago, Keyser_Soze said:

 

 

Fixed

Tbf the marketing department or

some idiot executive made Redfall a high profile exclusive. Had they not hyped it up and it just … came out maybe it wouldn’t be such a big stain. In hindsight it just looks like such desperation to have “something”. 
 

48 minutes ago, ShreddieMercury said:

Starfield is in a very unfortunate spot.  If Microsoft had better handled the last generation and the start of this one in terms of first party output, there wouldn't be half as much riding on this game as there is now.

well yeah, if MS had banger after banger for 10 years, one kind of disappointing launch wouldn’t. Just like Sony can suffer a high profile dud and people not think Sony is irredeemably in the toilet. MS hasn’t really had a high profile win in a long time. 
 

For Bethesda there was always going to be a lot riding on this game, because of how expensive this game would have been to make. I think this game was always going to do well. Bethesda jank and all. I think the fact that it IS an Xbox exclusive now puts more pressure on the title for sure. Especially since that makes more people eager to see it fail. 

[best3444]

Can someone please explain what this newest information is about in 3 sentences? 

[Paperclyp]

4 hours ago, ShreddieMercury said:

Starfield is in a very unfortunate spot.  If Microsoft had better handled the last generation and the start of this one in terms of first party output, there wouldn't be half as much riding on this game as there is now.  Given that it's Xbox's first high profile exclusive since the tremendously disappointing Halo Infinite, and that the corporate drama in between these releases has been astronomical, expectations are out of control and there is no way to meet them, no matter how good the game is.  I'm guessing that this will end up being a very good, bordering on great game in the typical Bethesda mold, but given everything up to now, its fate is to be an extreme flashpoint in the inane world of modern gaming discourse.

Eh I don’t think Starfield is in a particularly unfortunate spot. I mean, what exactly are the expectations that you don’t think it’ll hit? 
 

[ShreddieMercury]

1 minute ago, Paperclyp said:

Eh I don’t think Starfield is in a particularly unfortunate spot. I mean, what exactly are the expectations that you don’t think it’ll hit? 
 

 

I think it's the fact that it can be argued as the first premier, first-party exclusive for Xbox after a severe dry spell, releasing at the tail end of a phenomenal year for games, in a genre (space?) where people's expectations are generally very unrealistic.  Maybe that's overblown, but it feels like the temperature of this game has been continually rising, and Microsoft surely has very high expectations for the game's performance given the long development cycle and extreme QA effort.

 

I'm honestly not interested in playing the game, and don't have the time for something this sprawling, but the conversation around it even pre-release has been quite the ride.  I expect the reviews to be highly dramatic, and I can't wait.

[Paperclyp]

48 minutes ago, ShreddieMercury said:

 

I think it's the fact that it can be argued as the first premier, first-party exclusive for Xbox after a severe dry spell, releasing at the tail end of a phenomenal year for games, in a genre (space?) where people's expectations are generally very unrealistic.  Maybe that's overblown, but it feels like the temperature of this game has been continually rising, and Microsoft surely has very high expectations for the game's performance given the long development cycle and extreme QA effort.

 

I'm honestly not interested in playing the game, and don't have the time for something this sprawling, but the conversation around it even pre-release has been quite the ride.  I expect the reviews to be highly dramatic, and I can't wait.

I guess like, I would be surprised if it was anything other than a massive sales success unless there is something deeply wrong with it, so I don’t think it’s in much danger of missing a reasonable expectation, even if that is high. 
 

If you’re talking something more nebulous than that I just am not sure what we’re talking about lol. 

[legend]

19 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I guess like, I would be surprised if it was anything other than a massive sales success unless there is something deeply wrong with it, so I don’t think it’s in much danger of missing a reasonable expectation, even if that is high. 
 

If you’re talking something more nebulous than that I just am not sure what we’re talking about lol. 

 

I think he's talking about how people react to the game. Even if the game sells a lot, it's not great for MS if the reaction is lukewarm because a perception that MS can't release great exclusives is not good for the brand.

[skillzdadirecta]

Surprised this didn't turn up in this thread

 

Starfield's 'Boundary Reached' Drama, Explained - IGN

WWW.IGN.COM

---

Bethesda's epic space RPG Starfield is right around the corner and springing leaks left and right, with one 'Boundary Reached' message causing some concern among fans.

 

You guys are slipping.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

24 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Surprised this didn't turn up in this thread

 

Starfield's 'Boundary Reached' Drama, Explained - IGN

WWW.IGN.COM

---

Bethesda's epic space RPG Starfield is right around the corner and springing leaks left and right, with one 'Boundary Reached' message causing some concern among fans.

 

You guys are slipping.

 

I saw it and decided that the issue was too stupid to bother posting about, even by our admittedly low standards!

[Paperclyp]

13 minutes ago, legend said:

 

I think he's talking about how people react to the game. Even if the game sells a lot, it's not great for MS if the reaction is lukewarm because a perception that MS can't release great exclusives is not good for the brand.

I see. I just find that onus go be more on MS than the pressure to be on this game in particular. 
 

Though this could be a tipping point for Bethesda. Was Fallout 4 an underwhelming blip or was it indicative of the quality of game they’re able to make anymore. 

[legend]

4 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I see. I just find that onus go be more on MS than the pressure to be on this game in particular. 
 

Though this could be a tipping point for Bethesda. Was Fallout 4 an underwhelming blip or was it indicative of the quality of game they’re able to make anymore. 

 

I really hope BGS knocks it out the park. And I'll play this game even if it is just Skyrim in space (which it almost surely is). But it will be sad, because the open world RPG genre has evolved so much beyond what Bethesda did even though they were one of the early pioneers of it, and it would suck if they weren't able to step up with it.

[AshsToAshs]

20 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Surprised this didn't turn up in this thread

 

Starfield's 'Boundary Reached' Drama, Explained - IGN

WWW.IGN.COM

---

Bethesda's epic space RPG Starfield is right around the corner and springing leaks left and right, with one 'Boundary Reached' message causing some concern among fans.

 

You guys are slipping.

No Mans Sky nerds are upset there aren't more games with planets filled with nothing for them to walk endlessly in.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

8 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

Was Fallout 4 an underwhelming blip or was it indicative of the quality of game they’re able to make anymore. 

Is Fallout 76 chopped liver to you?!?!?

[Paperclyp]

1 minute ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

Is Fallout 76 chopped liver to you?!?!?

Yes 

 

(and actually I quite like fallout 4)

[Greatoneshere]

I agree about Microsoft needing a big exclusive win because the impression they've given gamers (right or not) is that they aren't releasing or making games, it's been a sparse, barren wasteland. That being said, Microsoft has released more exclusives than just Halo Infinite lately (obviously all of these games are on PC). Note Halo Infinite released almost 2 years ago now in December 2021.

 

-Halo Infinite

-Forza Horizon 5

-Grounded

-Pentiment

-Age of Empires IV

-As Dusk Falls

-Hi-Fi Rush

-Redfall

-Forza Motorsport (basically Forza Motorsport 8, about to release)

 

So it's not like Microsoft has only released one exclusive (Halo Infinite) for 2 years now, but no big AAA titles for the most part (except for Age of Empires IV and the Forza games) so Starfield definitely has some heavy lifting to do, I think. Only 9 exclusive games in 2 years, with only 4 being AAA releases (2 of which are racing games) is pretty abysmal. So yeah, Starfield will definitely either positively or negatively affect Xbox Game Studios' reputation because we're definitely at an inflection point with them.

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

1 hour ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Surprised this didn't turn up in this thread

 

Starfield's 'Boundary Reached' Drama, Explained - IGN

WWW.IGN.COM

---

Bethesda's epic space RPG Starfield is right around the corner and springing leaks left and right, with one 'Boundary Reached' message causing some concern among fans.

 

You guys are slipping.

how this is a surprising revelation to anyone is beyond me. Todd Howard even said the areas on a planet you could explore would be about the size of Skyrim’s map. That means not endless. 
 

they’re not even hiding that landing and takeoff are essential cutscenes. That too would seem to imply that the explorable area will be finite. 
 

Man, the closer and closer this game is getting to launch the more desperate people seem to be getting to convince everyone the game will be terrible. It’s actually making me think the game is going to be even better than the hype if this is all they have to use to shit on it. lol 

[Firewithin]

going to pre-load when i get home later and then let the wait begin for 5p tomorrow

[Mr.Vic20]

Pre-Loaded and it feels so right! 

[AbsolutSurgen]

Review embargo is tomorrow at noon EST.

[ShreddieMercury]

22 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

 

I don't think games are more layered than other works of art or literature, many of which have been the subject of critical analysis for decades or centuries. Even if we assume that's true, there is plenty of focused criticism that doesn't endeavor to look at the totality of a body of work and zooms in on a specific setting, character, or motif. When places do that, again, gamers inevitably pivot to the, "you said you like waffles, clearly you've neglected pancakes," perspective despite it being perfectly okay for someone to JUST talk about the gaming equivalent of waffles. I could go on but while I think gaming is unique because of its interactive nature I don't think it's that way to the extent to invalidate traditional critical analysis.

 

Besides I think it's vitally important to talk about the "often unintentional" political implications. Implicit biases, specific ethnocentric perspectives, etc.,  SHOULD be challenged or at the very least be called out. It says something when gamers get bent out of shape when people of color show up in Eurocentric fantasy settings but not when potatoes and tomatoes are all over the place. It says something that space exploration games often imply or overtly state that entire planets or star systems exist solely for obviously Western styled space programs to colonize, conquer, and plunder. That indigenous lifeforms mainly exist to slaughter for crafting resources or as a barrier to civilization.

 

I play and enjoy plenty of games like this, but the default gamer response to a lot of this criticism is that, "games need conflict," which is telling that we often see shooting people in the face or taking their land and resources as the "default" ways to make conflict. That SHOULD be looked at.

 

 

You are right on, and the sinister colonialism that's part of basically all western game design now deserves a serious look.  Also guns.  The difference I'm trying to draw here, and why I think games are more nuanced, is that they can contain both Tetris and Life and Strange, Rez and Papers, Please.  In some of the best games (and my favorite) in the entire medium, the interactivity alone is the game.  In others, that same tactile, core interactivity is not integral (or is at least secondary) to the experience.  How can you reconcile that with the exact same critical approach?

 

You've written very articulately in the past about games like The Last of Us, which are desperate to be taken seriously and think they have something to say, only to be gamified outside of their cutscenes by collectibles and achievements that are discordant with their themes. 

 

I think that's why game criticism is in a tough spot.  Anything is possible within games, which makes them amazing and worthwhile while also terrifying and often disappointing.  But effectively criticizing something as multi-dimensional as a video game from all possible angles, including whatever embedded societal and economic oppression they may represent, seems an impossible and thankless task in an environment where the general audience is terminally online and misinformed.  Not that it shouldn't be done, and often, but I do think the context is important.

 

I've written all of this and don't even know if it's making much sense.  My main issue is with aggregate review scores, and my frustration with simultaneously how pointless they are yet how much weight they carry.  Games deserve better than this system, but it's not going anywhere.

[skillzdadirecta]

17 minutes ago, ShreddieMercury said:

 

You are right on, and the sinister colonialism that's part of basically all western game design now deserves a serious look.  Also guns.  The difference I'm trying to draw here, and why I think games are more nuanced, is that they can contain both Tetris and Life and Strange, Rez and Papers, Please.  In some of the best games (and my favorite) in the entire medium, the interactivity alone is the game.  In others, that same tactile, core interactivity is not integral (or is at least secondary) to the experience.  How can you reconcile that with the exact same critical approach?

 

You've written very articulately in the past about games like The Last of Us, which are desperate to be taken seriously and think they have something to say, only to be gamified outside of their cutscenes by collectibles and achievements that are discordant with their themes. 

 

I think that's why game criticism is in a tough spot.  Anything is possible within games, which makes them amazing and worthwhile while also terrifying and often disappointing.  But effectively criticizing something as multi-dimensional as a video game from all possible angles, including whatever embedded societal and economic oppression they may represent, seems an impossible and thankless task in an environment where the general audience is terminally online and misinformed.  Not that it shouldn't be done, and often, but I do think the context is important.

 

I've written all of this and don't even know if it's making much sense.  My main issue is with aggregate review scores, and my frustration with simultaneously how pointless they are yet how much weight they carry.  Games deserve better than this system, but it's not going anywhere.

It's not just games. What you're talking about is the desire for true critical analysis that goes beyond " thumbs up or thumbs down" and that's just nor where we are in today's review environment in ANY medium but ESPECIALLY games. It's why I find most reviews to be totally useless and for me, pointless. Why go on and on about the story in a game which in a lot of games is completely incidental and not even the point of playing if you can't even tell me if the game functions as intended or not. Game reviewers today take themselves seriously but don't take the actual job seriously at all. You see a similar thing in TV and movie reviewing. 

[Dodger]

I now have a 5 day weekend for Labor Day that other than going to Metallica twice will be all about Starfield. Haters can get fucked, I'm sure I'll have a blast.