Support NeoGAF

[Last Hearth]

I personally prefer Starfield, CP is a shooter with almost no RPG elements.

 

[KyoZz]

"Maybe you don't pay attention" to my reply? I already referenced graphical glitches. Is that really your basis for Starfield being the better game? Sorry....but Starfield ain't exactly bug free and is missing features that should have bene there day one, such as DLSS, which is why the game's rating on Steam has been slipping consistently since launch.

And I gotta just roll my eyes and pointing fingers at CP's engine considering that ancient thing SF is built on. Come on man.

Sorry if I sounded harsh, was not my intention at all.
I'm not talking about some "rare, inconsequential graphics glitches". I'm talking about stuff you see regularly. NPCs IA is incredibly dumb rather it is in Starfield or CP imo.
And I'm not saying Starfield is the better game (I have yet to play more than 30 hours as I'm still going through BG3). Just that it's not looking bad, and is not rigged with bug like CP was at launch. It's a bit of an unfair comparaison for me. That's it.

Now to each their own and I fully understand that someone is more touched by the world of Cyberpunk. It's been carefully crafted for years after all.
Nuances, it's all about nuances.

 

[MikeM]

Yes......you need a poll.

On topic- absolutely. Cyberpunk is just a way more exciting game.

 

[LaughingStock]

I'm hoping mod support will go the way of Skyrim for Starfield. Cosmetics, player crafted quests, companion enhancements, new weapons/gear, enhancements to ship builder. I can see a lot of freedom and creativity in Starfield's future.

I believe starfield modding potential is bigger than Skyrim and fallout. And I'm sure someone will create an elder scrolls planet.

 

[GymWolf]

Talking about the video specifically.

I haven't finished big questlines in Starfield either (60 hrs in).

But I will be highly surprised if it were scripted in a cinematic way like they are in Cyberpunk.

I am enjoying the game so will play in depth and see if it's an rpg or not.

A game can be scripted without bombastic cutscenes and setpieces.


They are both way less than an rpg compared to bg3 if we base the meaning of the term around total freedom.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Absolutely. I think they aren't even in the same ballpark.

 

[Lokaum D+]

It's been a long time since I've seen a game with this many bugs. This is Fallout 76 level"

Maybe you don't paid attention? Maybe you got lucky? I don't know but at the end, CP is still freakin bugged. And some of those bugs are tied to the engine and how it is coded, that's why I say maybe you don't pay attention to them because they are literally unavoidable. And btw, my PC is a beast so it's not coming from there.

corrected u there, no need to thank me

 

[The Cockatrice]

CP is a shooter with almost no RPG elements.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Totally different games, there is a lot more depth to Starfield with what you can build and the size of the universe.
Cyberpunk is like a shooter with RPG elements, whilst Starfield is an RPG with some shooting.
As an RPG Starfield is a far superior game.

I struggle to see the "depth" of Starfield. The word universe seems amazing, grand and spectacular, but in reality is shallow and lifeless.

 

[Alebrije]

I find the 2.0 skill tree on Starfield more interesting and specially with real effect on gameplay the the ones on Starfield. RPG elements on Cyberpunk are more solid and focused on combat but also you have talk skills like the Streetkid one...

 

[Jormatar]

Yeah hands down.

 

[Macaron]

Let me add to every single comment saying the same thing

Yes

 

[vaibhavpisal]

A game can be scripted without bombastic cutscenes and setpieces.


They are both way less than an rpg compared to bg3 if we base the meaning of the term around total freedom.

Lol why did you edited in Baldurs Gate 3 bait?

Scripted is not an issue as such, I didn't say it was a problem, just a different design approach. Am playing Cyberpunk next, already looking at what kind of builds I wanna make.

Personally, am interested in seeing how much game changing events are available in Starfield. Like, nuking the city in Fallout games. Or freeing Madanach in Skyrim.

These are the sort of RPG elements I find most fascinating, something I see unfold in real time, in game world. I enjoy text based choice and consequences as well (ones in Baldurs Gate 3), but my preference is towards simulation style RPGs. Something Starfield is yet to prove its worth in my playthrough.

 

[Riky]

I struggle to see the "depth" of Starfield. The word universe seems amazing, grand and spectacular, but in reality is shallow and lifeless.

You can have a totally different gameplay experience between players in Starfield. Yes you can play the main quest and side quests just like Cyberpunk, exploration is on a different level in Starfield, you can become a botonist and just play the game that way.
Some people have just concentrated on building a ship or fleet of ships.
Some people have concentrated on creating an outpost or even a living city.
Some people have just played with physics and created things like domino chains.
Two players can have unrelated experiences of playing the game. That is what makes it far deeper than Cyberpunk could ever be.

 

[SmokedMeat]

All I know is after seeing the Cyberpunk 2.0 update I reinstalled, wondering why the hell I’m not playing Cyberpunk.

So I’ll be playing that after I get through some of my backlog.

Starfield is now a wait for nice discount game for me.

 

[BouncyFrag]

Dropped Starfield to play Cyberpunk and it’s not even close. I liked Starfield best when it was giving me a Fallout 3/NV vibe so I might actually play one of those games again soon. SF is a mess.

 

[salva]

Maybe.
I played 10hrs of cyberpunk at launch and quit.
I've played 60hrs in Starfield and see no end in sight.
...but I've just restarted cyberpunk 2.0. So will see....
"Why not both?"

 

[GymWolf]

Lol why did you edited in Baldurs Gate 3 bait?

Scripted is not an issue as such, I didn't say it was a problem, just a different design approach. Am playing Cyberpunk next, already looking at what kind of builds I wanna make.

Personally, am interested in seeing how much game changing events are available in Starfield. Like, nuking the city in Fallout games. Or freeing Madanach in Skyrim.

These are the sort of RPG elements I find most fascinating, something I see unfold in real time, in game world. I enjoy text based choice and consequences as well (ones in Baldurs Gate 3), but my preference is towards simulation style RPGs. Something Starfield is yet to prove its worth in my playthrough.

A bait? What?

I completed the post and then i thought of adding another thing, is this what people think is a bait here?

And why i should bait? I said that both games are inferior to bg3 in terms of rpg freedom, it was not a slander to starfield.

 

[Macaron]

Maybe.
I played 10hrs of cyberpunk at launch and quit.
I've played 60hrs in Starfield and see no end in sight.
...but I've just restarted cyberpunk 2.0. So will see....
"Why not both?"

No one is saying one has to suck. I enjoyed Starfield. Its just not as good in comparison

 

[GymWolf]

With no doubt yeah.

Starfield does certain things better, but Cyberpunk simply feels a gen ahead of Starfield in many key departments

Also OP you need a pool

Are we slandering poor people now?

Gaf is better than that, cmon.

 

[zephiross]

With no doubt yeah.

Starfield does certain things better, but Cyberpunk simply feels a gen ahead of Starfield in many key departments

Also OP you need a pool

As for the topic at hand, I've played starfield for maybe 5 boring hours give or take (which isn't enough to judge), and cyberpunk for several hundreds hours so you might rightly say i'm biased. But I immediatly knew cyberpunk was a great game from the get go (yes even in 2020, on PC at least) so that's a hard yes from me !

 

[Macaron]

You can have a totally different gameplay experience between players in Starfield. Yes you can play the main quest and side quests just like Cyberpunk, exploration is on a different level in Starfield, you can become a botonist and just play the game that way.
Some people have just concentrated on building a ship or fleet of ships.
Some people have concentrated on creating an outpost or even a living city.
Some people have just played with physics and created things like domino chains.
Two players can have unrelated experiences of playing the game. That is what makes it far deeper than Cyberpunk could ever be.

Two players can have unrelated experiences playing Cyberpunk too. A game with different methods of combat, endings, and dialogue choices that actually matter instead of the incredibly shallow "your annoying companion liked/disliked that" in Starfield. I could easily argue depth in actual gameplay is probably deeper than "go on empty planet and make outpost"

 

[Fools idol]

The world is infinitely more interesting in CBP277 for sure.

overall though they are quite similar - both under delivered at launch, extremely mid writing, very lacking in gameplay department.

Cyberpunk 2.0 is the better game, for me personally.

 

[BigLee74]

I'm being pedantic here, but wouldn't Neon vs. Night City make for a better visual comparison in this instance?

Why? Neon city in Starfield is a small compact ramshackle town built on a platform. No roads, no cars, small dingy alleyways. The only similarity is the neon lighting.

Night city is a huge chunk of the play area in Cyberpunk.

Not a great comparison.

 

[Kings Field]

 

[Hudo]

While I don't think both games are that comparable, I played through Cyberpunk through completion twice whereas I dropped Starfield after 10 or so hours.

 

[R6Rider]

Yes, even at launch.

I wanted to finish the story of Cyberpunk at least and so I did. Starfield I made it to 21 hours and couldn't force myself to play anymore.

These two games mark the two most disappointing of all time for me too.

 

[Riky]

Two players can have unrelated experiences playing Cyberpunk too.

Not really, some variety in combat that you have to go through to progress, puddle deep compared to what I just described.

 

[Robbinhood]

Its not even close, starfield is a 6 or 7 at best, Cyberpunk isn't a 10 but its a lot better than Starfield.

 

[GymWolf]

It's crazy to me how people forgot how broken CP was at launch, and how everyone was making glitch compilations with the naked T-posing, the cops and all the other broken AI stuff. Starfield launched in a much better state comparatively.

Btw the video doesn't even show original CP but the expansion instead, that is considered vastly better after three years of patches.

No it fucking didn't, at least if we compare cyberpunk pc with starfield pc.

Dude, you don't wanna start a bug compilation video war because the starfield bugs i can show you are leaps and bounds more absurd than anything you can find for cyberpunk, i'm talking about time-space parallel universe type of bugs, not your average 'i can't talk to this npc" stuff, the ball is in your court.

Starfield is in a better condition compared to skyrim but it is still more bugged than most games.

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

You can have a totally different gameplay experience between players in Starfield. Yes you can play the main quest and side quests just like Cyberpunk, exploration is on a different level in Starfield, you can become a botonist and just play the game that way.
Some people have just concentrated on building a ship or fleet of ships.
Some people have concentrated on creating an outpost or even a living city.
Some people have just played with physics and created things like domino chains.
Two players can have unrelated experiences of playing the game. That is what makes it far deeper than Cyberpunk could ever be.

Well, I'm guessing I'm a different type of player, I have trouble immersing myself into a game where every interaction I had with NPC's, main quest or not are so lackluster. Cyberpunk is not perfect, but between the world, the characters and the narrative there is a cohesion that I find easier to immerse myself into. The characters have personalities, movement, reactions that I find more genuine and a lot more polished than Starfield.

But at the end, I agree with you on different players will experience those games differently. You use the word "depth" to describe possibilities to do activities that aren't exactly crafted into the game narrative. Whereas, the depth in Cyberpunk comes through the meticulous crafted world and experience you get to live in it.

Until comes a time when I can play a game like Starfield with the polish of Cyberpunk (not just graphically but narrative and world building). I will still prefer to play a character rather and insert myself into a game. Starfield felt like something like that could be possible in the current gen, but the reality is that we are not there yet.

 

[MiguelItUp]

OG Cyberpunk and Starfield kind of had something in common for me, where passed the half way point I skipped dialogue and story here and there. I just didn't really care too much anymore. I DID care more about Cyberpunk in the long run, but not by much. However, I wouldn't be surprised if 2.0 helps quite a bit. I didn't think the writing and dialogue was bad or anything like that, I just think it lost me the further it went on.

I feel like 2.0 COULD make the overall package of Cyberpunk feel better than Starfield. But the OG was only slightly better IMO.

 

[mortal]

Why? Neon city in Starfield is a small compact ramshackle town built on a platform. No roads, no cars, small dingy alleyways. The only similarity is the neon lighting.

Night city is a huge chunk of the play area in Cyberpunk.

Not a great comparison.

I was asking for a visual comparison, given the cyberpunk themes of both locations. I already know they're not comparable with respect to scale, as I already said, I was being pedantic.

 

[SF Kosmo]

I like Starfield, but yes, and it's not really that close. Cyberpunk has better writing, memorable stories and characters, an incredible, seamless, immersive world, really interesting abilities and progression (in 2.0), and pushes hardware to the absolute limits of graphical tech.

Starfield is more replayable and has a lot more open ended stuff like building and decorating and all that, and there are certain players that are going to gravitate more to that kind of long haul, play for years kind of experience, but as a core single.player game I think Cyberpunk is one of the best around.

 

[yet_another_alt]

Dude, you don't wanna start a bug compilation video war because the starfield bugs i can show you are leaps and bounds more absurd than anything you can find for cyberpunk,

I don't know about that, I saw this one video of V riding a bike then suddenly T posed while still on the bike then he lost his pants. I don't think even a Bethesda game can top that.

 

[marjo]

As someone who's loved Cyberpunk since release (PC version), it's my opinion that Cyberpunk is better than all AAA games released in the last 3 years.

 

[FlyyGOD]

There are alot of comments in here from people who have never even played Starfield. You aren't going to get honest answers from people who are jaded with an agenda.

 

[GymWolf]

I don't know about that, I saw this one video of V riding a bike then suddenly T posed while still on the bike then he lost his pants. I don't think even a Bethesda game can top that.

I hope you are seriously kidding right now, that shit doesn't even register as a bug compared to the stuff i can show you from starfield.

 

[Topher]

I don't know about that, I saw this one video of V riding a bike then suddenly T posed while still on the bike then he lost his pants. I don't think even a Bethesda game can top that.

Those T poses were early bugs from its initial launch. I haven't seen those in quite a while.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Because the RPG elements although they have an impact on combat have very limited input on outcomes in Cyberpunk, almost none in fact. Unlike Starfield.
Cyberpunk is very shallow in comparison.

This may have been true of Cyberpunk at launch but it's one of the things 2.0 addresses big time. The skill tree really gives you different ways to play now.

 

[Macaron]

Not really, some variety in combat that you have to go through to progress, puddle deep compared to what I just described.

You just described building outposts, customizing a spaceship, or having too much time on your hands and jerking around w physics. These are just bullshit things. The ACTUAL game of Starfield is incredibly shallow in almost every way, with Crimson Fleet quest being the only outlier since the choices you make actually matter instead of just "Your boring companion who is written horribly likes/dislikes that"

 

[yet_another_alt]

I hope you are seriously kidding right now, that shit doesn't even register as a bug compared to the stuff i can show you from starfield.

I'd be happy to spend the morning laughing at bugs so please do.

 

[FlyyGOD]

How long it took for cyberpunk before the mass enjoy. Let’s give starfield the same, it gonna get more content and changes. Also mods it self. If you want a game you can get lost in for hours. They both great at that.

I remember when Cyberpunk 1st came out and it was hated as much as Starfield.

 

[yet_another_alt]

Those T poses were early bugs from its initial launch. I haven't seen those in quite a while.

I personally never seen them but they were still hilarious. Like the enemy that was kerenzikoving out of the way of bullets then T poses just to emphasize how shit your aim is.

 

[GymWolf]

I'd be happy to spend the morning laughing at bugs so please do.

I have to search a bit for the video i wanna show you, but the comedic effect is greatly increased if you actually did the quest that i want to show you so you can understand how fucking broke the game can be.

Have you played the mission where you have to save barret? It's not very far in the campaign.

Edit: there you go, the fun start at around min 5 but i can't stress enough how having played this mission add to the comedic effect.

 

[Riky]

You just described building outposts, customizing a spaceship, or having too much time on your hands and jerking around w physics. These are just bullshit things. The ACTUAL game of Starfield is incredibly shallow in almost every way, with Crimson Fleet quest being the only outlier since the choices you make actually matter instead of just "Your boring companion who is written horribly likes/dislikes that"

They may be "bullshit things" to you, but they are available to players unlike Cyberpunk and are therefore as much part of the game as you decide they need to be, it's called choice.

 

[JayK47]

It took 3 years of patches, but Cyberpunk now does many things better. Both games at launch are/were flawed games that I did not want to stop playing. Both are great. Starfield will only get better. Cyberpunk is now basically done.

 

[Vlodril]

The op is a coward for not adding a poll.

As far as the games go it is laughable to put Starfield anywhere near CP 2077. In almost every single part of the game. As many have said Bethesda seems to still be making the same game they made for the last 30 years. They have been cruising on auto for decades but since everyone jumped in the open world wagon the last few years it has been obvious how much behind the curve they are these days.

 

[Macaron]

They may be "bullshit things" to you, but they are available to players unlike Cyberpunk and are therefore as much part of the game as you decide they need to be, it's called choice.

No they are just bullshit things. This is like if I argued "Cyberpunk is so much deeper cause I can do all the fixer missions and become the most notorious merc, or I could avoid those and just do all the cop helping missions and become a good guy, or I can become a street fighting legend with all the Beat the Brat missions"

You're just being silly. Building a fucking outpost or changing the parts on your spaceship isn't some incredibly deep thing that offers different experiences for different people. Its just something you can do.

 

[ResurrectedContrarian]

No you did not, you selected a screen of New Atlantis (which honestly don't look really good) were you could have taken Neon City




Is it CP2077 level? Nah of course, but it still looks good. So stop pretending Starfield is looking bad, and maybe start pointing all the freakin bugs CP 2077 still has.
Also, I'm gonna make a thread in 3 years comparing modded Starfield and CP 2077.

I don't really care about the tech (seems fine), but that video is atrocious from a design and immersion perspective.

Everything is okay until the horribly bland NPCs show up and reveal how boring this world is. Then the club at the end, lol... I like my dystopian futures to be cool in some way, not the all-too-current-day dystopia where the sexy club is basically androgynous quasi-men moving weirdly in the middle of a room full of lifeless and passionless NPCs from an HR brochure. It even ends in a unisex bathroom, rather fitting for any video showcasing this world.