Would you recommend NMS to someone who:
Really wants to play Starfield but probably won't have the necessary hardware for at least a year.
Is an old Bethsoft fan, having played, and thoroughly enjoyed, every TES game from Daggerfall to Online, excepting only Battlespire and the phone games.
Has been jonesing for some space sandbox for probably a decade at least.
Crypt of the Necrodancer: Roguelike to the beat! Dance pad compatible.
I don't know much about specs. I just find it fascinating that people are actually defending Bethesda in this post. Where's the standard anti-Bethesda fandumb pile on?
Mario games are all right, except for all the platform jumping.
You don't need the biggest map ever to make a good game. You do, however, need the biggest map ever to make a good Elder Scrolls game. People referring to BG3 don't really understand the essence of the Elder Scrolls, a vision the series has pursued all the way back to Arena.
I don't think it's any more reasonable to expect honey bees to be restricted to their "native lands" any more than cows, or wheat. But flowers will feed whatever happens along, and wildflowers will feed what tends to live in that area.
If people really want to save the bees, they need to replace lawns with fields of wildflowers.
I agree with everything he said. But I've also been saying things like that for thirty years. I remember when Morrowind came out complaining about companies using extra processing for shitty 3D graphics instead of sticking with high quality 2d that works perfectly fine and putting that extra processing power to work on better AI or something.
I think the problem is that better graphics is the one thing they can do that will please a mass audience. Sure, there are plenty of other things they could be doing, but I would bet that each of them has a niche appeal that will have fewer fans to spread the cost among. Thus producers of "AAA" titles pretty much by definition have to pursue that mass audience. The question is when they reach that point of diminishing returns and be becomes more profitable to produce lower cost niche titles for smaller audience. And we also have to factor in that part of that "profit" of pleasing that assumption our society has that anything with niche appeal is necessarily "lower" in status than mass appeal stuff.
I think we are approaching that point, if we haven't already reached it. Indie stuff is becoming more and more popular, and more prevalent. It's just hard to tell because indie stuff tends to target a smaller but more passionate audience. For example, while I am looking forward to trying Starfield out, I may be too busy playing yet more Stardew Valley to buy it right away, and end up grabbing it in a sale. (I haven't even really checked if it'll run on my current gaming laptop.)
We have multiple generations of developers releasing like this. With a few rare exceptions (which are the only games from 15+ years ago most people remember), all games release buggy. Even on console, for every Super Mario Bros. that played the way it was supposed to, there were ten unplayably buggy examples of licensed shovelware. And half of "Nintendo Hard" was just that these games were janky as fuck.
Games are hard to make. Ridiculously huge and complex games are even harder to make. If you think you can do better, please do so.
Murderous at each other, not the player.
Their games have always been as wide as an ocean and shallow as a puddle. That's what we like about them. Get out of my giant splashy pool!
I've probably seen it here more than on Reddit, but that's because I spend more time in the general gaming community here, while on Reddit I was in the fan community specifically... particularly teslore, where "Duh, TES lore is stupid and random" doesn't get much traction.