“Over one THOUSAND planets!”
4 Likes
I love how super detailed some of their NPCs look, I mean compared to their previous games it’s a huge improvement. But I say some, because there are also NPCs in that deep dive that didn’t look nearly as detailed as this guy here.
So maybe truly important folks will look very realistic, but the lesser important ones not.
The only uncanny valley part of the NPCs for me is the eyes, which hopefully they can improve before launch. Everything else is a gigantic step up from Fallout 4.
4 Likes
As much jokes and memes there are about the man, he was not lying when he said it’s like going from Morrowind to Oblivion. It is indeed a huge overhaul. The comparison videos are gonna be great once the game out is. In fact, I bet there are already videos where the older games are compared to the deep dive.
Yes, after Cyberpunk 2077 the eyes in Starfield are really subpar IMO.
I felt like the woman welcoming you into Constellation was badly animated but all others looked and moved super well. The one black guy who talks about your background was maybe too clean cut in appearance but the detail on his face was still rly impressive and he still animated well. The thing I noticed that rly impressed me was how the voice acting and facial movements perfectly lined up with the lip syncing (except for that one woman I noted). Something about it seemed much better than in other games somehow but can’t put my finger on exactly why.
Just gonna point out that the eyes looked weird (to me at least) only in the one scene welcoming us into Constellation, BUT I think that was due to the fact there was a floating artifact in front of them with tons of light sources embedded within it, so it kinda made a reflection in their eyes that was overly sparkly. The other characters seemed fine eyes-wise imho.
I have to admit, I did notice the Consteallation Lady’s eyes did look a little odd, compared to most of the other characters when I first saw it at the Xbox/Bethesda show
And I did think to myself, “oh no…this is gonna become a fucking thing, isn’t it”
2 Likes
It’s the same with the eyes of the other characters in that scene. All super sparkly. Her anim was rly rough I felt too, but everyone else’s was rly rly good.
The walking animations by NPCs is very nice too, that new animation system putting in work.
Yeah but their eyes…uncanny…RAAAARRRR…valley…
Yeah, they are a bit weird. But overall it’s such a big improvement, I’d be OK if the eyes remain that way. Not that I’d be against them fixing it though.
CDPR have always had the best NPC character and facial animations/lip sync in RPGs. Really hope whatever tech they have can be shared or licensed to other RPG studios
You’re probably right, although I also think the way Barrett’s eyes emoted was a bit over the top. His eyebrow movement was off the chain, haha.
Edit: I personally don’t think the comparisons to Cyberpunk are fair. Starfield is orders of magnitude larger and more complex than Cyberpunk, which means the resources need to go elsewhere.
1 Like
Yes… Starfield is orders of magnitude larger then CP
Infact CP is more about density and Starfield is more about vastness
Density of cyberpunk is a challenge on its on as well
It’s a big reason why this game struggles so much
It’s also about the level of interactivity in the world. Cyberpunk was dense and stunning, but fairly static. In Starfield, like all BGS games, you can pick up everything in the environment and that means it all needs to have actual geometry and physics applied to it.
Also, most of Cyberpunk’s dialogue choices were surface level flavour and didn’t drastically alter the outcome of stories. I would imagine Starfield will go a lot further here, especially when it comes to the four factions and how they all relate to and interweave with each other.
The thing nothing that you mentioned would change anything for BGS that much, because it is all about quality of animation (granted I bet a lot of stuff is procedural).
1 Like
NASA replied to the Starfield account.
8 Likes
And this is why it is useless to compare these two games one on one
Totally different games
All these arguments/comparisons about the two games have no relevance when it comes to discussing wanting the eyes movement and tracking in Starfield to be better. CP is a top 12-15 game for me ever, unless they completely drop the ball Starfield is practically a lock for my top 10, with a good chance to be in the top 5. It’s going to be a fantastic game, but I can still not be a fan of the doll eyes.
1 Like
I think overall, Starfield from a graphics perspective looks fantastic, how many games are there out there with that scale that looks as good as that with the amount of interactivity and systems running as it does?
People love to clown on Todd and BGS but based on the trailer, he’s not lying about the engine upgrade, that’s a massive step up from Fallout 4 and their other games
BGS strength has always been their art design rather than the character models, I do agree that some models have that sort of dead look in the eyes but honestly, it means very little to me but its a huge step up either way
It’s the performance im hoping they can nail from here, that 60fps video that someone made, I think it was Colt made the gameplay look magnitudes better than the stiltedness the trailer had so I really hope they have a 60fps option when it releases
1 Like