Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action
Subject: Re: Today is the One Year Anniversary For The Release of Starfield
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2024 21:20:03 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: the-candyden-of-code
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <slrnvdms1k.2gr4v.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
References: <vbf1hm$re44$1@dont-email.me>
 <119mdjtcemf913rft4fbv3snpn4vi544du@4ax.com>
Injection-Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2024 23:20:04 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="dc9db37842cd51fd00f3e72424361a7f";
	logging-data="1024280"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/aUT23OLDbocbW5R643fmm5YgvvOvXPZ8u1cG+pUNfAg=="
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Nh9+0k8rqADKQdsiKxE5rI19Gl0=
X-Face: b{dPmN&%4|lEo,wUO\"KLEOu5N_br(N2Yuc5/qcR5i>9-!^e\.Tw9?/m0}/~:UOM:Zf]%
 b+ V4R8q|QiU/R8\|G\WpC`-s?=)\fbtNc&=/a3a)r7xbRI]Vl)r<%PTriJ3pGpl_/B6!8pe\btzx
 `~R! r3.0#lHRE+^Gro0[cjsban'vZ#j7,?I/tHk{s=TFJ:H?~=]`O*~3ZX`qik`b:.gVIc-[$t/e
 ZrQsWJ >|l^I_[pbsIqwoz.WGA]<D
Bytes: 2890

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 15:55 this Friday (GMT):
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 07:53:57 -0600, "rms" <rsquiresMOO@MOOflashMOO.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Yes, yes it is.  And I still haven't played it!
>
> Me neither. It doesn't help that Bethesda is still asking $70 USD for
> it. They seem to think it's a Skyrim-class game or something.
>
> The thing is that "Starfield" is not -from what I've read- a terrible
> game. I'd play it, if it werent' so overpriced (and if I could stomach
> another 100-hour open-world title, which is an increasingly large hump
> for me to cross). But it isn't an EXCITING game. It's a Bethesda RPG
> through and through; buggy, with uninteresting characters and only
> tolerable mechanics. Worse, it lacks the hand-crafted world-design
> that made "Skyrim" so memorable. 
>
> I'll play "Starfield", maybe, eventually. I'm just not in a rush to do
> so. But it isn't offering me anything new; it isn't doing anything
> that "Mass Effect" or "Skyrim" or "No Mans Sky" haven't done before,
> and it isn't doing it any better than those games. It's biggest
> recommendation is that it was 'made by the people who made "Skyrim"!'
> and if that's the best it's got to offer, I wonder why I don't save my
> money and just play "Skyrim" again. 
>
> Drop it down in price and maybe I'll consider it. But "Starfield" is
> definitely not a game I'm going to pay premium pricing to enjoy.


70$?? From what I've heard, it's a really mediocre game and certainly
not worth that much. Of course, I don't have a Xbox anyways, but still.
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom