Starfield Madness has Officially Begun!

Before you ask...no, I'm not currently playing Bethesda's shiny new space-RPG Starfield.  I am, however, engaging in a sort of voyeuristic enjoyment of reading reviews and social media hubbub.  The hype train for Starfield has been running at full steam for quite awhile now and it's nice to finally see some actual impressions from players.

Firstly though, just let me say that I think the whole "premium edition" offering that lets people play a few days prior to release feels a little bonkers to me.  People are paying $99.99 to play 5 days earlier?  (I mean, sure, you do get the soundtrack, a digital artbook, and some sort of "story expansion" too)  Kudos to the corps for figuring out a way to get people to pay extra for basically nothing.  I suppose you do get the pleasure/bragging rights of doing something before most people, but I think I'd just save that $30 and wait (that's like half the price of another big name game!).  I also gotta kudos them for dropping the premium access before a holiday weekend in the U.S. Plenty of time to enjoy that extra $30 worth of game that you paid for.

If you haven't seen or read any reviews yet, the good news is that they're mostly positive.  The metacritic score is currently sitting at 88, which isn't Baldur's Gate 3 level of greatness, but it's not bad (and yes, you do sort of have to take metacritic scores with a grain of salt).  Games that are 80+ generally pique my interest, so that's encouraging.  The only full length review I read was from PC Gamer and they gave it a score much lower than the 88--a 75.  Some of the things that I was skeptical about are mentioned in the PC Gamer review.  Those 1,000 planets...yeah, it seems like they're a pretty mixed bag.  The reviewer mentions finding a few unique ones, but that most of them have a copy-past exploration type of format that involves running, finding a thing, and then leaving.  Another review I saw mentioned the fact that the story is pretty forgettable--which, quite honestly, squares with my experiences in Skyrim and the Fallout series.  To me, Bethesda's games are more about interacting with the world and experiencing all the weirdness that comes with that rather than a deeply engrossing and focused story.  It sounds like Starfield follows that formula but does have some improvements to gameplay.

I'm not going to be running out and buying Starfield any time soon, but it does sound like something I'd be interested in at a future date.  Maybe when it starts going on sale.  I'm glad that people are saying mostly positive things about it even if it doesn't sound like the next gaming masterpiece.

Happy gaming and Labor Day weekend!

Color Me Skeptical About the 1,000 Planets

As I mentioned last week the hype train for several big name fall releases has fully left the station.  And, I suppose that those hype trains are pretty dang good because Starfield immediately shot up the Steam best-sellers list--this despite the fact that the game doesn't release until September!  Yes, it's shiny, and yes it's something new from the makers of Skyrim and Fallout, but let's try to maintain some common sense here people--please stop pre-ordering.  I can tell that definitely made like one person stop...lawlz  (not really).

I've been getting inundated with Starfield related articles and posts on my socials, so I thought I would share one that made me go "hmmm."  And not necessarily in a good way.  According to this article, "only about 10% of planets will have life on them."  This raises so many questions and isn't necessarily a bad thing (although my first reaction was to be a bit boggled).

One of those empty Mass Effect planets.

If we're being realistic (I mean, as realistic as one can be when they're playing a space role-playing game that will undoubtedly feature a shocking array of penis-shaped ships and weapons thanks to the customizable nature of both), most planets in space would be barren and devoid of life.  So, points for realism!  Buuuut, from a gameplay perspective...umm, what exactly are players going to be doing on the 900 planets that don't have life?  I'm vaguely hoping for something Mass Effect-like, where even if a planet is empty, there might be a bandit hideout to raid, artifacts to find, or resources to mine.  Or something exploration related.  I just hope they didn't decide to chock their game full of lame, empty planets so they could brag about those 1,000 planets...because it does sort of sound like that at points.

No Man's Sky tried to do the whole "infinite planets" deal and semi-succeeded at it.  At least landing on those planets is somewhat interesting--there are always weird new critters, plants, and minerals to discover.  I'm just not sure people are going to be into that fun "magnificent desolation" feeling that Mr. Howard seems to think will be so alluring.  I think they're going to need more to keep them landing on all those desolate planets--like some smokin' hot loot.

So, again, I'm giving the side-eye to Starfield.  I really do hope it turns out to be a modern RPG-masterpiece, but right now I'm gonna give it the ol' squinty look and totally distrust the hype.  Beware the hype, folks!

Maybe it's Time to Give Up on Triple-A's

I was trying to think of which new, upcoming titles I'm excited for and most of them aren't the big budget bangers.  With the recent news that Redfall, Arkane's newest release, is an utter flop (and, a $69.99 at that!), I'm feeling a bit skeptical about the state of triple-A gaming.  Firstly, this $69.99 thing is ridiculous.  I realize that we're living in a period of high inflation, but for $70, I better be getting a regular masterpiece that offers up something magical.  Secondly, I can't help but think that this is tied to the fact that so many of these studios started off small, had success by making great games, and then promptly got gobbled up by the corporate powers and now, sadly, have lost what made them great in the name of profits.  Maybe it's time to start looking to smaller, indie studios for truly great games.

With that said though, there are a couple big name games that I'm interested in (however, I'm not pre-ordering, I'm not going to day 1 jump on the boat--that ship has sailed and everyone should be cautious given the current track record of recent big releases).  Bethesda's Starfield currently has a release date of September 6th and I'm intrigued by the idea of a space-Skyrim.  At the same time, I'm feeling a tad on the skeptical side thanks to a few things I've read.  Awhile back they were semi-bragging about the fact there are supposed to be a large number of "unique" explorable planets (like thousands!).  I seriously have my doubts about their "uniqueness" given the number.  My personal tenet when it comes to some of these games that like to brag about the massive size of their playable areas is that "size ain't everything."  Who cares about planet #9,000 if it's a slight variation of the other #8,999 planets?  You need a solid story and enjoyable gameplay to bring it all together, and sadly, too many of the uber-games seem to focus on a big, pretty world that is lacking in depth.

A story this week revealed that there won't be any actual sex scenes in Starfield, but apparently your character can wisecrack about the experience afterward.  Am I disappointed about this fact?  Not at all--video game sex scenes are generally cringey at best.  This news was thanks to the ESRB revealing the fact that it will release with a M (mature) rating.  No boning, but there is drug use and swearing.

Even though I'm pretty sure Diablo III is responsible for giving me a mild case of carpal tunnel syndrome, I'm also a bit jazzed for Diablo IV.  I spent many an hour giving myself that carpal tunnel as I (poorly) fought through the legions of hellish enemies with multiple characters and classes.  I haven't played the beta, but I also haven't heard anything devastatingly bad about it, so I'll be keeping an eye on it.

On the indie front, I'm excited about SteamWorld Build, a new city builder in the SteamWorld universe.  If you're unfamiliar with the series, it's a very interesting one.  The games stretch out over multiple genres but take place with a set of characters based in the same universe--SteamWorld Dig is the first and is an action/platformer; SteamWorld Dig 2 is the next chapter with similar gameplay and carries over the characters from the first game.  Then the series branched out into SteamWorld Heist--a turn-based RPG set in space (it's my favorite!).  The most recent game, SteamWorld Quest: Hand of Gilgamech, is a deck builder/card battler.  (FYI, the whole collection is currently on sale on Steam--you can get all these great games + their soundtracks for $21.97).  I'm excited to see if they can keep the SteamWorld magic rolling with a city builder.

If you are a fan of the tabletop-like RPG Wildermyth there's a new DLC that features tons of new armors and skins for just $5.  Just five bucks to make your unique heroes even more unique!  Totally worth it--plus, I enjoy the fact that it was developed by group of family members and I'll gladly throw more cash at them.

A Grain of Salt or a Pile of Salt?

There has been a lot of buzz recently around one of the few new and upcoming games that I'm actually feeling excited about--Bethesda's space RPG Starfield.  Unfortunately not all the buzz seems to be of the positive type and I've read a few things that make me feel a bit skeptical.  As someone who just recently finished one of many playthroughs of a Bethesda classic (Fallout 4), I have some thoughts about what I'd like to see (and not see) in my potential future Starfield adventure.  Let's start with the not-so-great news first.

Starfield: everything we know is the main source I read for a nice, comprehensive list of details that have come out from the recent XBOX showcase and other info released from Bethesda.

Skeptical Feelins':

1.) There will be 1,000 planets to explore.  Sure, that sounds great, but to me I sort of internally cringe.  I've gotten to the point any more where it's a bit of a turn off when games brag about how big they are.  In my experience, size usually just means recycling locations and using them as filler (and filler that's usually completely pointless and unsatisfactory--I'm looking right at you Assassin's Creed).  I would much rather have a smaller number of truly engaging places (maybe with chaining storylines/missions) than a giant, empty, repetitive cycle of people to stab or shoot or generic military bases to pillage.  One article also mentioned that many of these planets had a fairly generic, grey, rocky look that sounds pretty bland.

An image of one of the 1,000 planets.  The rocks are pretty and all, but let's
hope that the other 999 are more interesting than this one.

2.) Of course these 1,000 planets will use procedural generation.  This has me worried that they will possibly try to re-birth one of the most annoying features of Fallout 4--the never ending litany of faction-oriented side quests that pick a random place on the map and ask you to go there and do a thing.  I always reach a point were I intentionally try to avoid turning in those missions because I don't want to get saddled with another one.  Please, for the love of gaming, do not make this a feature in Starfield.

3.) It's first-person and your playable character is of the silent, dialogue selecting type.  When I first read this I was a bit floored--is it 1996 or something?  Not that the story and/or dialogue are usually the best parts of Bethesda games, but really?  I suppose that it works in Skyrim (which is apparently still somehow managing to stay on top of many best seller lists), but it just feels a bit old fashioned and like they're missing an opportunity to find a great VA to headline 

Sounds Cool:

1.) Character creation is apparently much more detailed than it has been in other Bethesda games.  This is good news for gamers who love to tool around and create unique, beautiful characters.  Me, I am lame and usually go with the default.  Apparently there's also quite a list of unique traits that you can pick for your character.

2.) You get your own spaceship that can be customized.  I'm hoping that this system is more robust than what I picture in my head (namely a few interchangeable choices that don't offer much uniqueness).

3.) Space outposts!  My favorite part of Fallout 4 is the ability to build unique settlements and then watch them develop.  I'm hoping that they improve upon the settlement building system (it would be cool to be able to build special buildings that offer perks for a settlement--one thing it does mention is the ability to hire specialists to work in your settlements).

The real question we have to ask ourselves at this early-ish stage is whether we should take much of this pre-release info with a grain of salt.  As we all know too well, the hype train is strong and sometimes you just need to take a step back and not fall for the sparklies that the devs like to flash in front of us.  Starfield isn't coming out this year, so we've got awhile to wait.

The Games of 2022

I enjoy gaming, but I'm not the kind of person who wants to spend a bunch of time watching all the uber-announcement megashows (your E3's or Nintendo Direct or whatevergamerconthing)--just point me to the trailers and I will decide from there.  There has been a recent spate of gaming related announcements from these events and there are several upcoming titles that I'm going to be keeping my eye on.  Fingers crossed that 2022 shapes up to be a great year in gaming!

The game that has most piqued my attention is Starfield, a Bethesda title that was described as "Skyrim in space."  I like Skyrim and I like space...so those two factors lumped together are enough to get my blood pumping.  It's going to be interesting to see how the acquisition of Bethesda by Microsoft impacts the game, the release, or various other factors.  Unshockingly it will be an XBOX exclusive (sorry Playstation peeps).  Will Starfield contain the numerous hilarious bugs and general weirdness of the classic Bethesda title?  Will I have a space-equivalent Lydia to haul around all of my space dragon bones?  I'm watching you Starfield, so don't disappoint!  

Since I'm not hugely into triple A titles, the other announcements that were noteworthy were for games that skew more toward indie status.  Most notably, the adorable Slime Rancher is getting a sequel!  Slime Rancher 2 looks to include tons of everything that I love--cute slimes to interbreed (seriously, bunny slimes? Slimes with little anglerfish-like lures?  Bunny-Anglerfish slimes!), sucking up tons o' plorts, and a bright, sparkly world to explore.  If you want a cute, relaxing game to chill out to...do check out the original Slime Rancher.  

As a big fan of the whacky and comedic hospital management sim Two Point Hospital, I was floored to see that Two Point is releasing a whole new world to meticulously manage...the world of the university campus!  Of course, this isn't your typical university and the courses look like a mishmash of goofiness (which I'm completely here for).  Excitingly, the trailer also promises that there will be even more freedom in designing and managing your campus.  AWESOME!  

A couple of other indie titles also caught my eye--Terra Nil offers a compelling twist on the traditional city builder--what if instead of destroying nature to build a city you were tasked with restoring nature?  The trailer features several of my favorite features--namely relaxing music and the promise of a chillaxin' good time.  (There's actually already a demo on Steam of you want to check it out)  

I was also intrigued by the animation in a game called Planet of Lana.  It is tagged on Steam as a sidescroller/platformer but also "story rich."  Color me curious!  Plus, I'm a sucker for any game that includes interactions with cute critters (and I'm getting some Ori-esque vibes from the little black creature).  I've already wishlisted it and can't wait to see what shakes out.  

So many trailers and so much promise!  Let's hope that nothing crazy happens (like more pandemic delays) and that 2022 shapes up to be a wonderful year filled with great games.