• iheartneopets@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I feel like I’m in some sort of fugue state with everyone comparing this to Skyrim. In what way is this like Skyrim? Skyrim, for all its flaws, at least had hand crafted worlds with interesting things to see and do in them. From what I’ve seen of Starfield, that has been completely replaced by procedurally generated barren worlds. Like yeah, you can ‘explore’ them, but for what? What is there even to find?

    • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Skyrim, for all its flaws, at least had hand crafted worlds with interesting things to see and do in them

      Virtually 100% of main and faction story arcs are hand-generated content. I would go further and say Starfield used more distinct model-sets than Skyrim did.

      For context, Skyrim’s map was ALSO procedurally generated, but most (or all) of the content was built on top of it by hand. We have comparable amount of manually generated content in Starfield, and then tons of procedural content allowing for a larger overall world.

      Starfield is approximately 100,000x larger than Skyrim. So yeah, a lot of it is going to be procedurally generated. But you follow a general path, and everything along that path is NOT.

      So… no fugue there. Both have similar amounts of handmade content, but Skyrim has a lot of filler content, and that filler content is largely barrel worlds, something that works because planets tend to be barren.