It's going to be a long night![]()
I'll try to take a nap before starting the game so I can play longer lol.
It's going to be a long night![]()
The cost isnt high, but a simple thing, like UI, can make that nigh impossible. If you dont have a way to enter the exact same seed it's kinda moot that'd be technically and theoretically possible.Of course not, but as seen in the thread that seems to be a worst issue for some people than the opposite. What would be the cost (in terms of development complexity) of keeping those seeds so people returning to a site see the same site?
I mean, if that cost is not huge that would mean BGS has deliberately decided that completely random terrain every time is better for the player? I mean, maybe, that would still seem weird though.
I recently saw several videos claiming that Starfield will be reviewed bombed by “anti-Xbox” magazine critics. All of them included PCGamer for some reason.
Just don't resort to the amber nectar too soon - as you may sleep through release time.I've already eaten all the crisps and goodies I had stashed for the early hours...I'm staring wistfully out of the window whilst the 3D printer whines away in the background...hell in it's worst form![]()
Despite cruising from one end of the galaxy to the other in Starfield, I never really felt like I was going anywhere.
I recently saw several videos claiming that Starfield will be reviewed bombed by “anti-Xbox” magazine critics. All of them included PCGamer for some reason.![]()
You could go fishing for a while.I've already eaten all the crisps and goodies I had stashed for the early hours...I'm staring wistfully out of the window whilst the 3D printer whines away in the background...hell in it's worst form![]()
Ouch, I expected 85-90 / 100 range for most reviews.
I've also been looking at the reviews being retweeted by Bethesda - which are unsurprisingly more positive. One thing I note is they mostly totally ignore space flight and concentrate on the fun mat grinding and combat.I recently saw several videos claiming that Starfield will be reviewed bombed by “anti-Xbox” magazine critics. All of them included PCGamer for some reason.![]()
I learned a long time ago to pretty much ignore 'reviews' by kids who work for gaming rags.IGN gave Cyberpunk 2077 a 9/10 on release, yet Starfield, which is way more polished, a 7/10. That's some rubbish reviewing skills.
Ok, but that would mean that keeping seeds has a high dev cost in terms of complexity for them.The cost isnt high, but a simple thing, like UI, can make that nigh impossible. If you dont have a way to enter the exact same seed it's kinda moot that'd be technically and theoretically possible.
It needs to be reproduceable by the user in a normal game situation.
Sapping a bit of my enthusiasm for being a helpful star-hopping cowboy was the star-hopping itself. I never expected Starfield to be the sort of fully open-ended spaceship sim Elite Dangerous is, or for it to replicate the freedom of flight in No Man's Sky, but it's hard not to feel like there's something missing here. I never felt excitement or awe, no goosebumps as my engines fired, no sense of grandeur as I set down on a new world. That's because despite cruising from one end of the galaxy to the other in Starfield, I never felt like I was really going anywhere.
True that it's not a 'full' review bomb, but 75-77% is long known to be the 'sweet spot' when trying to let people know that the game isn't that great but also not peeing off the publisher with the review.I wouldnt categorize that review as "bombing"