Starfield steam page for the DLC currently shows eight user review score of 41%, making this one of the worst Bethesda DLC's released of all time. This is so horribly, shockingly bad for Bethesda, because it shows as a gaming company, they are no longer capable of delivering a really good gaming experience as they had in the past. Some of the reviews sum up quite nicely what is wrong with this DLC....

Less content than any skyrim DLC. Less than The Fallout 4 story DLCs. Doesn't change of the complaints people had with the base game, writing is still at a 4th grade level.

Quick: If you are looking to buy my answer is no, you aren't missing much content. I was really hoping to enjoy this DLC. Took about 4 hours for the main story and maybe 2 more hours to 100% the achievements.

These two reviews I think really summed up what Starfield has become, $70 for an AAAA title that has extremely little buy-in from the community, horrifically low amount of replayability and can be breezed through easily. It's mind-boggling to see this

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

but fallout 76 has improved. so are ghosts updating it?

nah youre right makes perfect sense

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

So Bethesda is good because Starfield might be worth playing 10 years after it was released? You're obviously not understanding the point here.

It doesn't matter that they improved '76 after the fact. It matters that they keep releasing top dollar garbage that needs years of work after the fact to even be playable.

Like imagine if you bought a brand new car that broke down immediately after you drove it off the lot. You take it back to them and they tell you "We understand you're disappointed, so if we get time we'll fix it for you and should have it back to you in a year or two." Are you going to be satisfied with no car and no money for that long? Does it really make it better if they do actually fix it at some undetermined point in the future?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

very convinient line of thinking for you

"76 doesnt count because it got better after release"

i bet you still hate on cyberpunk and no mans sky to this day, and curse those devs every night, right?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Is that my "line of thinking" when I never said anything of the sort? I don't think so.

I've never played Cyberpunk 2077 nor No Man's Sky and have zero opinion on them, but you bringing them up out of nowhere as some sort of 'gotcha' screams "my argument is based on emotion and not fact."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

what is factually wrong about 76 being improved after release? that's the entire thing, i'm not the one convienently ignoring those facts because it doesnt support my argument 😂

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

For the fourteenth time, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion.

You talk about conveniently ignoring things while you're ignoring the whole topic so you can keep talking about some updates to Fallout '76 as if that has any bearing on Bethesda trending toward doing worse and worse with each new release. You're making a completely separate argument to the rest of us.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

actually its only the 6th time, not 14th. how can i trust your word now?

and 76 has gotten new releases pretty frequently. they are called content updates or dlc, which are free on that game. i think bethesdas only released 2 other games since 76, redfall, which was done by a different studio, and starfield