Game Discussions Bethesda Softworks Starfield Space RPG

Interesting; this got me thinking since I grew up on NES/SNES/successors and always had a price of about $50 US stuck in my head as a typical video game cost. I found a site with some old receipts and was seeing $60-95 today's dollars for Atari 2600 games, and Super Mario 3 at around $115, so $75-$90 (70 EUR - 70 GBP) seems about in line with historical. Considering asteroids was $93 we get a heck of a lot more content for the same money though!


edit: mistyped currency unit


1990 NeoGeo game cost about $200. Today that would be about $465. I only knew one person that had that console.
 
... I still don't know about the watch. Got the controller.. just wow, though not wow enough for a backup / second. Really close to getting the headset, but not completely sure. As a headset itself its garbage, but the collectability is amazing.. i love the concept, looks, design, box, just hesitant to buy an inferior functional product in every possible spec to what i already use.

The watch though is.. im just not 100% convinced it will be good. At least with the other kit, its official xbox hardware just reskinned, so there's a guaranteed level of quality. Maybe if they didn't release these options the watch would be more appealing.. i don't know.

Oh yeah for these items i would use all the kit purchased, its not just going to be on a shelf somewhere.

Also every time i see another OA video or skim through bits of the presentation again.. can't wait :) I don't think microsoft would let them release something so bad its like an early access game or anthem.. it would at minimum be AAA launch quality with so many eyes on it. Everything will at least be finished, there might be some systems that change over time etc.
 
... I still don't know about the watch. Got the controller.. just wow, though not wow enough for a backup / second. Really close to getting the headset, but not completely sure. As a headset itself its garbage, but the collectability is amazing.. i love the concept, looks, design, box, just hesitant to buy an inferior functional product in every possible spec to what i already use.

The watch though is.. im just not 100% convinced it will be good. At least with the other kit, its official xbox hardware just reskinned, so there's a guaranteed level of quality. Maybe if they didn't release these options the watch would be more appealing.. i don't know.

Oh yeah for these items i would use all the kit purchased, its not just going to be on a shelf somewhere.

Also every time i see another OA video or skim through bits of the presentation again.. can't wait :) I don't think microsoft would let them release something so bad its like an early access game or anthem.. it would at minimum be AAA launch quality with so many eyes on it. Everything will at least be finished, there might be some systems that change over time etc.
They released Halo Infinite. But its really really hard keeping the volcano levels of excitement at bay.
 
... I still don't know about the watch. Got the controller.. just wow, though not wow enough for a backup / second. Really close to getting the headset, but not completely sure. As a headset itself its garbage, but the collectability is amazing.. i love the concept, looks, design, box, just hesitant to buy an inferior functional product in every possible spec to what i already use.

The watch though is.. im just not 100% convinced it will be good. At least with the other kit, its official xbox hardware just reskinned, so there's a guaranteed level of quality. Maybe if they didn't release these options the watch would be more appealing.. i don't know.

Oh yeah for these items i would use all the kit purchased, its not just going to be on a shelf somewhere.

Also every time i see another OA video or skim through bits of the presentation again.. can't wait :) I don't think microsoft would let them release something so bad its like an early access game or anthem.. it would at minimum be AAA launch quality with so many eyes on it. Everything will at least be finished, there might be some systems that change over time etc.
Don't underestimate Bethesda's ability to publish bugs against all odds.

:D S
 
They released Halo Infinite. But its really really hard keeping the volcano levels of excitement at bay.

Don't underestimate Bethesda's ability to publish bugs against all odds.

:D S

It was a long time ago, but trying to remember the skyrim launch.. the bugs were significant but it was still getting positive reviews. That exact balance is what im calibrating for.

The microsoft / xbox factor is also significant, i guessed that howard wanted to release last year but microsoft told them to keep fixing it, adopting it to be a console exclusive and carry that as well. They also screwed over redfall for it, so they've actually walked over with their eggs and put it in the basket.

Also its a completely different company sure, but from playing eso, relatively speaking to the industry that's bug free, even with its known and long running issues. If they do the same as eso there won't be bugs mentioned in reviews.

Yeah mainly the fact that they really were going for that 11.11.22 date and its 10 months later.
 
It was a long time ago, but trying to remember the skyrim launch.. the bugs were significant but it was still getting positive reviews. That exact balance is what im calibrating for.

The microsoft / xbox factor is also significant, i guessed that howard wanted to release last year but microsoft told them to keep fixing it, adopting it to be a console exclusive and carry that as well. They also screwed over redfall for it, so they've actually walked over with their eggs and put it in the basket.

Also its a completely different company sure, but from playing eso, relatively speaking to the industry that's bug free, even with its known and long running issues. If they do the same as eso there won't be bugs mentioned in reviews.

Yeah mainly the fact that they really were going for that 11.11.22 date and its 10 months later.
Bethesda is one of a select few companies that I forgive when their launches or updates are buggy. Frontier is another one. I am a Frontier - Elite II and First Encounters survivor. And I played Daggerfall as well.

:D S
 
Bethesda is one of a select few companies that I forgive when their launches or updates are buggy. Frontier is another one. I am a Frontier - Elite II and First Encounters survivor. And I played Daggerfall as well.

:D S

For me.. i'm pretty much planning in a second playthough after mods.. so whether its the first or second go, it will be bug free enough

Hopefully the game is fun.
:)
 
I've played every game from Fallout 1 (when it was released) and Daggerfall (same) to FO4 (avoiding FO76..) and every time I've seen the unbridled ambition of that developer AND the vast amount of bugs, jank, rough parts, that make it to just every release from them.
Except that Fallout 1 and 2 were Interplay Productions's IP.

Those games had nothing to do with Bethesda Softworks. Bethesda purchased that IP many years later to make Fallout 3, their first Fallout title.
 
Interesting; this got me thinking since I grew up on NES/SNES/successors and always had a price of about $50 US stuck in my head as a typical video game cost. I found a site with some old receipts and was seeing $60-95 today's dollars for Atari 2600 games, and Super Mario 3 at around $115, so $75-$90 (70 EUR - 70 GBP) seems about in line with historical. Considering asteroids was $93 we get a heck of a lot more content for the same money though!


edit: mistyped currency unit
Bear in mind that the article you linked to was written in 2011. Original retail price for 2600 was $189.95, which if you look at www.usinflationcalculator.com shows that to be $953.28 in 2023 money. I can't recall the source for my original retail price for carts, but working it backwards it would have been around $40. After researching, I've seen it be mostly around $25-$35, which works out to be $150-$175, so still not that far off tbh.

Either way, it makes the average full price of $40-$70 these days seem extremely reasonable ($70 = $14 in 1977 money!), especially when considering what you get in comparison.

However, it's very important to note that the sales of the top selling games far exceed that of the games from the Atari 2600 days, the highest selling 2600 game was Pac Man at 8,095,586 copies, which is still pretty great, but compare Minecraft with 238,000,000, and you can see the difference. Factor in digital distribution vs manufacturing and shipping cartridges and I'd say the profit, even at the present levels is probably equal to or higher per unit today than when the 2600 was released. Which is just as well as I would suggest that the development costs for modern games do not track proportionally to that of the Atari 2600 era when factoring inflation into the overall equation at all.

Honestly, $70 for a game like Zelda; Tears of the Kingdom, or Starfield (if it actually turns out as good as they show) seems very reasonable all things considered. Makes the 1977 $7.97 price for the Odyssey expansion look not so expensive either, and the sale price of 1977 $2.79 a positive bargain. Or have I gone too far with this? :whistle:
 
Last edited:
Hey guys. I'm confused why people are harping at the $70 price tag on the game. You don't have to go that route.

Get gamepass for $10. Then spend spend $32 to upgrade from the gamepaass standard edition to the premium edition for $35.


Upgrade from Standard Edition and receive the following bonus items:
  • Shattered Space Story Expansion (upon release)
  • Up to 5-days early access
  • Constellation Skin Pack: Equinox Laser Rifle, Spacesuit, Helmet and Boost Pack
  • Access to Starfield Digital Artbook & Original Soundtrack
 
Last edited:
It was a long time ago, but trying to remember the skyrim launch.. the bugs were significant but it was still getting positive reviews. That exact balance is what im calibrating for.
Which were never fixed by Bethesda. Instead you must download at least 4 patches by modders to make it playable.
 
Hey guys. I'm confused why people are harping at the $70 price tag on the game. You don't have to go that route.

Get gamepass for $10. Then spend spend $32 to upgrade from the gamepaass standard edition to the premium edition for $35.
Maybe people don't want to have to keep paying to rent the game every month. TES and its various makeovers like Starfield are games people often play over long periods with mods, but within 3 months of gamepass, you'll have paid more than other deals that leave you with ownership.
 
Which were never fixed by Bethesda. Instead you must download at least 4 patches by modders to make it playable.

Not really.. unless you're going to perform a qa like testing experience on every inch of the game and every quest.. im sure you're been okay for the last 5 or 8 years given how deep and random skyrim is. Having said, when they upgraded to the special edition and allowed access to more ram, it did make mods much more stable.
 
Hey guys. I'm confused why people are harping at the $70 price tag on the game. You don't have to go that route.

Get gamepass for $10. Then spend spend $32 to upgrade from the gamepaass standard edition to the premium edition for $35.


Upgrade from Standard Edition and receive the following bonus items:
  • Shattered Space Story Expansion (upon release)
  • Up to 5-days early access
  • Constellation Skin Pack: Equinox Laser Rifle, Spacesuit, Helmet and Boost Pack
  • Access to Starfield Digital Artbook & Original Soundtrack
If you play Starfield longer than 7 minths you pay even more than 70. And if you cancel sub, you cant play SF anymore.
 
Hey guys. I'm confused why people are harping at the $70 price tag on the game. You don't have to go that route.

Get gamepass for $10. Then spend spend $32 to upgrade from the gamepaass standard edition to the premium edition for $35.

I have a trial of gamepass from a previously bought controller ready to go :) 30 days free and starfield makes it very convenient to try.

What i strongly dislike these days is new releases on pc being sold for full rrp just for the digital copy... and only available on one marketplace. Looking at diablo.. if you want that on pc, you have one choice.. only from battle.net at at the absolute full defined rrp. That's it.. i bought it on console mainly on principle.. at least i got a steelbook and thick poster and can exchange the disk if i want to. Its nice to get something more than a bit in a database for your money... its almost a scam to pay 2023 prices for digital only.

For starfield.. i think i'll stick with gamepass to see how it works out. I preordered the physical upgrade edition, so get the steelbook. I think the plan is to wait until the pc copy gets heavily discounted then pick it up. There's quite a few games i want to play on gamepass as well that aren't worth buying (ori games, planet of lana etc).

ps. The diablo thing on console probably worked out.. it seems that it was very fundamentally designed as a console game first...

Holy crap darktide is on gamepass too.. great. Edit: there's heaps of games there.. haven't played jwe 2 either. oh crap.. scratch that.. everspace 2 is there as well. definitely not paying money for that, will keep the sub until i finish everspace 2. And the paw patrol racing game and turtles game with my boy, and i want to play quake 4 again.. don't think i even finished that. Dreamlight valley.. another one i'm never going to pay money for. Wonder if mum will be interested.

.....

So.. errr.. will you all be hanging around the elite dangerous forums still??? Its been clear for years that lack of competition was a key pillar in keeping elite alive... Diablo iv has been enough to get me to stop playing.
 
Last edited:
So.. errr.. will you all be hanging around the elite dangerous forums still??? Its been clear for years that lack of competition was a key pillar in keeping elite alive... Diablo iv has been enough to get me to stop playing.
Well, I'll be here to the end (mod ban hammers permitting... Oh, and death) if possible.

I'd like to think that both Star Citizen and Elite won't be much affected by the release of Starfield; on the grounds that, while 'similar' (read: Space), they are completely different game types - MMO and all the other things etc. My 'liking' to think is that perhaps the number of players might drop a bit but then re-stabilise. Of course, I might be wrong. However, I don't want to be wrong: I loved this game even if I don't play it much anymore (mainly at the moment due to work commitments) and wanted to see it succeed.

I say 'wanted' because there are few - perhaps now only 1 or 2 - of some 20 players that actively play Elite that I knew near game-start - the others haven't touched it for years. On top of that since DB and MB lost the helm to the ship - for whatever reasons - it's changed. In my eyes not necessarily for the better. YMMV: newer players are liking it so let's hope it keeps going for a lot longer.

On that note, I will say that Elite will lose me to Starfield. So there's at least one player that will be lost. Sure, I'll log in occasionally to ED and have a poke around, but that's about it. I hit the glass ceiling in Elite and can go no further. There's a caveat to this: Note that my ceiling wasn't game-defined. I have one Elite rank (combat - was at 12% deadly when EDO was released but somehow went to Elite for killing scavengers - on foot); I have no large ships, no King/Admiral rank (or whatever they are), but it's just not for me anymore. NOBODY publicly has found Raxxla despite it being 'a tiny bit obvious' (to quote the late and great MB). I've not discovered anything new or interesting that otherwise has only given cash for a reward (e.g. discovering an ELW or a plant with a freaking whisk).

But back to Starfield. I hope it takes me a year or two (hopefully more) to complete the main game: I want to do the side missions, explore, set my bases up. Add new mods, that will hopefully come with complete new massive missions to keep me occupied.

One thing I liked about the Starfield Direct video is just how ridiculous you can make your ship. That 'mech' design was a freak! But what that means to me is the developers/designers have been 'free' enough to allow you to create absolutely insane designs.

I am looking forward to a story to follow - I've never done that except in game produced before 2003 (showing my age?). AND I want it an open world experience. 1000 planets is enough for me.

MOST importantly - if I do a reset on a save - I want it to be engaging and fun from the start. There's another game I play still in Alpha (NOT a space game, so no, not Star Citizen) that every year or two wipes save and IT'S SO MUCH FUN starting from scratch! If I can do that with Starfield - and have a new path to take - I'll take it! So long as it's fun - and I think it will be because I'll see things that were not available to me previously as a different character type. Start Elite again from scratch, though? No way! There's no chance in the world I would ever start ED again because I know what would be involved.

I think the main thing that draws me to Starfield is that (A) it's open world and (B) has a story. I want both - and if I don't have MMO or co-op, so be it.

My long-term hope is that they'll produce a co-op version. That would be awesome. If it doesn't happen that's fine if it continues to be a great game.
 
Well, I'll be here to the end (mod ban hammers permitting... Oh, and death) if possible.

I'd like to think that both Star Citizen and Elite won't be much affected by the release of Starfield; on the grounds that, while 'similar' (read: Space), they are completely different game types - MMO and all the other things etc. My 'liking' to think is that perhaps the number of players might drop a bit but then re-stabilise. Of course, I might be wrong. However, I don't want to be wrong: I loved this game even if I don't play it much anymore (mainly at the moment due to work commitments) and wanted to see it succeed.

I say 'wanted' because there are few - perhaps now only 1 or 2 - of some 20 players that actively play Elite that I knew near game-start - the others haven't touched it for years. On top of that since DB and MB lost the helm to the ship - for whatever reasons - it's changed. In my eyes not necessarily for the better. YMMV: newer players are liking it so let's hope it keeps going for a lot longer.

On that note, I will say that Elite will lose me to Starfield. So there's at least one player that will be lost. Sure, I'll log in occasionally to ED and have a poke around, but that's about it. I hit the glass ceiling in Elite and can go no further. There's a caveat to this: Note that my ceiling wasn't game-defined. I have one Elite rank (combat - was at 12% deadly when EDO was released but somehow went to Elite for killing scavengers - on foot); I have no large ships, no King/Admiral rank (or whatever they are), but it's just not for me anymore. NOBODY publicly has found Raxxla despite it being 'a tiny bit obvious' (to quote the late and great MB). I've not discovered anything new or interesting that otherwise has only given cash for a reward (e.g. discovering an ELW or a plant with a freaking whisk).

But back to Starfield. I hope it takes me a year or two (hopefully more) to complete the main game: I want to do the side missions, explore, set my bases up. Add new mods, that will hopefully come with complete new massive missions to keep me occupied.

One thing I liked about the Starfield Direct video is just how ridiculous you can make your ship. That 'mech' design was a freak! But what that means to me is the developers/designers have been 'free' enough to allow you to create absolutely insane designs.

I am looking forward to a story to follow - I've never done that except in game produced before 2003 (showing my age?). AND I want it an open world experience. 1000 planets is enough for me.

MOST importantly - if I do a reset on a save - I want it to be engaging and fun from the start. There's another game I play still in Alpha (NOT a space game, so no, not Star Citizen) that every year or two wipes save and IT'S SO MUCH FUN starting from scratch! If I can do that with Starfield - and have a new path to take - I'll take it! So long as it's fun - and I think it will be because I'll see things that were not available to me previously as a different character type. Start Elite again from scratch, though? No way! There's no chance in the world I would ever start ED again because I know what would be involved.

I think the main thing that draws me to Starfield is that (A) it's open world and (B) has a story. I want both - and if I don't have MMO or co-op, so be it.

My long-term hope is that they'll produce a co-op version. That would be awesome. If it doesn't happen that's fine if it continues to be a great game.
The early game is often the most fun part. I had lots of Skyrim playthroughs I never "finished". I set myself milestones and build a character around an idea and when they can stand on their own legs I attempt something funny and that concludes it often.
 
Back
Top Bottom