Today is NMS, tomorrow is modded Starfield. Personally i played NMS recently and the game was too focused on space exploration to hook me. Starfield has space exploration and a handful of other gameplay modes to hook me. Diversity is strength.Which game is that from? Did they ever show / tell you what the megastructures were?
Even if not, it's pretty crazy how many interesting lore-only worlds there were in ME1 and 2. Just an incredible couple of games with a lot of imagination.
I feel like imagination is lacking in a lot of newer games to say the least, like Starfield here. In a post-Elden Ring world, Fromsoft has basically dunked on every other developer that coasts on low-effort success-riding.
In any case... Better space exploring game: Starfield or the current version of No Man's Sky?
They might if it becomes popular and big enough.Hmm do they send C&Ds for stuff like that? I can see disney doing it.
Prolly, I was on a Star Wars multiplayer text game in the 90s and Lucas film sent us a C&D lol. We just completely ignored them cause get fucked.Hmm do they send C&Ds for stuff like that? I can see disney doing it.
Yeah I kinda enjoyed Fo4 and the building thing. I had shit built up at every remote outpost in Fo4, including defense and all. It was pretty fun setting all that shit up. Have not delved into this at all here yet, only at like 40 hrs or so. THe thing that made it sort of cool in Fo4 is they would get randomly attacked from time to time, so there was a purpose to it. I mean its not like you really NEEDED a place to stay at, since you were constantly moving around and shit while playing.
They can be attacked but I think it only happens if you show up. Not 100% on that, though.I haven't had it happen to mine(which I only built yesterday), but I thought I read that your outpost can be attacked in this game also? Is that not the case?
After delving into the outposts more, I am a bit disappointed. It really is much more focused on extraction/production than settlement. I wanted more of a colonial feel them corporate mining, tbh. There's also quite a bit less freedom in building your outpost then FO4 had. Being stuck with existing structures instead of building walls and roofs as you see fit is a regression in my mind.
I doubt realism has been a huge driver for any decisions made about inclusion of content in starfield in the last year.In terms of the structures themselves, ya. Like why can't I add windows to the solid hab structures? My options are either full windows or no windows at all.
I do hope they add more options in a future DLC. And if their reasonings are "realism" as to why they dont allow more free form building, I ran across 2 NPCs sitting around a campfire on a planet with no O2 in the atmosphere and was walking around on Mercury when a thunderstorm happened, so I think they need to get that in order before they can pull any realism card lol
Ah the ole lower the shadows down. That and the "turn off the grass" are old goodies.So if you want a nice performance boost with next to no drop in fidelity turn shadows down to high from ultra. All high to ultra does is make shadows slightly less blurry and more sharp, at the cost of 10-15% frames even on a 4080.
High 74fps;
View attachment 490158
Ultra 58fps;
View attachment 490157
All the other lighting options seemed to have very minimal impact or none at all for me. But Shadows on high keeps the fps above 60 most of the time which really makes the game less annoying to play.
True, except in this case from what ive seen so far comparing screenshots around New Atlantis the difference is pretty negligible but the fps impact is huge.Ah the ole lower the shadows down. That and the "turn off the grass" are old goodies.