The other person literally said Oblivion is good despite the engine being 80% gamebryo. Don't write like AI and ignore context. The stuff that is really bad in Starfield is the design philosophy of autogenerated content. This is entirely different from the engine choice.

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

No it's exactly the same, you just notice it more because of the different context of a limited fantasy realm versus open stellar exploration.

Oblivion and Skyrim also have a bunch of procedurally generated content. But it is more easily ignored, because these are dungeons and caves and not numerous planets where you are walking for upwards of 15 minutes or more across open terrain to visit the same dozen locations. And having dozens of loading screens to stitch each small segment together.

Starfield as a concept doesn't work with the engine, because the engine is incapable of adequately creating an open environment at that level. If it could, they would have given it to us instead of Skyrim in space. We got Skyrim in space because that's the limit of the engine. Bethesda's insistence of continuing to use it, and claiming that it's not an issue, despite the clear deficiencies in the released product, is a slap in the face to every player. It's the definition of "You'll take what we give you, and like it".

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

It works in TES because x, y, z and not in Starfield because x, y, z.

Starfield doesn't work with [Skyrim engine]

It's Skyrim in space

Which is it? I'm confused.