That’s not how cult classics work. Cult classics don’t start as over-hyped and over-sold properties that failed to perform. Starfield will never be “legendary” because it never was legendary. Earthbound is legendary. Breath of Fire 3 is legendary. Terranigma is legendary. Starfield fucking sucks, and not just by comparison to other RPGs.
I feel like the same thing happens with cyberpunk. I constantly see nostalgia posts praising it and I really feel like it was a pretty mid RPG. There was really nothing ground breaking and you could point to any aspect of the game done better in other games - and yet I see lots of posts talking about how it was so epic and a classic. Meh.
Cyberpunk did a lot of things good, but very few things great. I think what it comes down to is that they continued to work on the game after launch until it was in a much better place than when it started. No Man’s Sky went the same direction (though I think now it’s safe to call that one a classic). Starfield could have been great, if Bethesda didn’t suck so bad. When it launched we knew it would be buggy and nearly unplayable, that’s just Bethesda SOP, but there are very passionate community members that mod the hell out of Bethesda games and that’s kinda what people were counting on. For some shitbrick reason, though, Todd Howard decided to wage war against the modders, and that left a pretty bad taste in a lot of mouths. The core group of fans keeping your games above water for the last 30 years, and you shit on them because your ego is bigger than your peepee? That’s why Starfield will never be legendary. Skyrim didn’t have some amazing story that brought the world together as one. It was just a really rewarding sandbox for modders and players alike. Starfield isn’t, and it’s Howard’s fault.
I think I have about 170 hours in the game, there abouts. I haven’t played it in over two years, and I doubt I ever will again. Mostly what I remember about it is big, empty landscapes, and a handful of dungeons with exactly the same enemies in the same spot every time. The “cities” were tiny, and the side quests were boring. Oh! There’s a girl who loves books, but no ability to give her the books you can collect–I don’t know how they missed that. The game blows and sucks at the same time.
In contrast, FO4 is running in the background as I type this, and I have over 6700 hours in it. How did they fuck up Starfield so completely?
Oh joy, I can’t wait for Starfield: Actually good edition to release in 2038 for the Ouya 2
More like the game wasn’t ready for people, it was in a dog shit state. I don’t know if it is any good now, but my motivation to try it again isn’t there.
I really enjoyed Starfield. Just like all Bethesda games, the main story line was weak. The side quests in Neon was really cool (love that city). I got decently far in the main storyline, but got burned out quick. Fighting Space pirates are always fun.
I did enjoy all the cool scifi easter eggs.
I tried discovering all the planets/moons but after hitting 500+ (I havent played it in over a year now) they are pretty much the same. The wildlife is all the same, just repainted/renamed (I get it can’t be feasible to make new models every galaxy).
I get they were going with realism with majority of the planets and moons were empty and just had a couple things to scan.
I think Starfield was decent, not top tier like they want, but I think a few solid patches and good improvements could make players come back around. Idk I enjoy unique games and this was one.
