@Freed is right.
Obsidian took the essence of FO3 and put their own spin on it. So it’s normal that you get a feeling that it’s a Bethesda game.
And if you want know if Avowed is similar to TES, I would recommend to play Pillars of Eternity because you don’t get any similar vibes to TES.
Isn’t that kinda what SSDs are supposed to help alleviate though? Perhaps it still takes too much resources, but you’d think they could stream that sort of stuff in as you approach a door. I’m sure it’s not as simple as that.
Obsidian have suggested that while Avowed started as being more like TES, it’s evolved over time and they’re focusing on their strengths rather than trying to emulate BGS.
Obviously there are very superficial similarities (fantasy, first-person RPG, magic and sword gameplay etc.) but the value of Xbox having both BGS and Obsidian is that they don’t need to be doing the same thing.
“More like TES” could be anything from gameplay to RPG elements.
Just playing PoE and any TES game you know that the lore, world and vibes are not similar at all. And that was my point. To say play Avowed to get a glimpse of TES is wrong.
SSDs don’t eliminate loading screens. They just make them much, much quicker.
Yeah, I’m more hyped, Starfield’s melee combat is a huge improvement over previous Bethesda games.
I would think of a streaming system like a cache, where it is attempting to determine what data is needed and load it into memory before it’s needed. With an SSD that ‘before’ can be pretty quickly before it’s needed, to have less of an impact of the RAM usage.
I don’t know how CPU intensive their stuff is though, I think a lot of that streaming stuff might work out better for textures and other asserts where they can leverage hardware decompression.
From what little I know about BGS games, very. Which is why it’s 30fps on Xbox.
I’m really excited, because all the tech they have for Starfield will be used here BUT in much ‘smaller’ scope. They will just need to focus on specific biomes for the landscape, terrain, flora & fauna, which can give them more time and resources to make creatures, enemies, settlements, PoI’s, architecture. It will be huge game, of course.
I’m much more invested in the Bethesda format than I am the Elder Scrolls universe specifically - generally I’m more looking forward to Fallout 5 than ES6. But I said ages ago I could see a scenario where Bethesda are on their usual high form for Starfield but the open universe stuff doesn’t pan out and I feel like that’s roughly how the game turned out. I’m confident in their ability to make a more typical experience like an Elder Scrolls would likely be.
Yeeeeeeeaaaaah…I think Bethesda has the gunplay perfected for the most part but a game focused on melee combat will need a lot of work. That and the magic system.
I’m not sure what’s funny? It definitely is a huge improvement over previous games.
They need to hire those modders who did those crazy combat/magic overhauls, or at least take inspiration from them, just don’t make them like devil may cry lol.
Agree.
The only thing missing from melee in Starfield is more weapons and weapon customization to make them do more damage.
On higher difficulty it’s a little bit of a struggle to fight a group of aliens in high level zones, as they tend to attack in groups of 6 and up. But like in Fallout 4, normal attacks stagger enemies, we got critical hits back without having to invest in a skill, blocking is a mix of TES hold it down and Fallout time it. The animation forces us to commit like fallout 4 and we can use the heavy attack to mix in a stronger hit, in a 3-4 hit combo.
My thinking the reason why people say melee sucks us because it’s not putting out as much damage as guns do. Which imo, even in FO4 melee was never as good as using a gun, specially if you don’t use vats to do things like teleport 20 meters to sneak attack someone(I don’t use Vats often in Fallout 4 and never in 3).
For a melee weapon to even compete with a gun in this game it would have to hit like a sniper rifle for every hit.
Yes ? It’s still just strong and light attack. But then they remove directional attack which was in FO4. Also zero block feedback.
If we look outside of combat you can see that Bethesda didn’t focus on combat at all. 6 weapons, zero modification options, melee weapons can have gun perks, ect.
Genuine question. Would you really call this a huge improvement ?
They remove directional attack from FO4 and add crit to normal attack without invest into skills is an improvement ? It’s still feels bad and IMO it’s not worth a praise.
I’m the same really. The two things I like most about Starfield, the gunplay and the ship building, don’t directly translate to Elder Scrolls.
I don’t remember any direction attacks in FO4, and adding crits back is most definitely an improvement. I do remember directional attacks in Skyrim and they were worthless.
And it’s still feels bad. You can’t parry, weapons don’t really have weight to them, 4 slash/hack animations, ect.
And when we talk about melee combat how does the AI/enemy behave ? Can’t they even stagger you in melee ?
And looking at the skills and perks. Most of them are just DMG+, taking less DMG, crit chance+, lifesteal.
Cyberpunk melee combat is much better. I would even say Dark Messiah of Might and Magic’ combat is better.
Don’t get me wrong. I love Starfield and gunplay is fantastic. But melee is not good.