this is being posted everywhere today. starfield was dead a year ago, 2 years ago, and 3 years ago as well. wonder if itll be dead next year and then the year after that too
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
78 points (98.8% liked)
Starfield
3056 readers
1 users here now
Welcome to the Starfield community on Lemmy.zip!
- Follow instance rules (no spam, keep it civil and respectful, be constructive, tag NSFW)
Helpful links:
Spoiler policy:
- No spoilers in titles; if you want to share images with spoilers, preferably post the image in the body of the post. If you do make an image post, mark it NSFW.
- Add
[Spoilers]to your title if there will be untagged spoilers in the post. - Game mechanics and general discoveries (ship parts, weapons, etc) don't need a spoiler tag.
- Details about questlines and other story related content are spoilers. Use your best judgement!
Post & comment spoiler syntax:
<spoiler here>
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
They consider Quake a "key franchise"?
Could have fooled me. Why aren't we getting Quake games then?
because bethesda can only release 1 game every 10 years, apparently, and starfield took up the last slot?
I don't really think it should tbh. The multiplayer Quake crowd will never like anything that doesn't play exactly like Q3A, and I don't see what a new single player Quake could do that Doom couldn't.
Arena shooters died with frosted tips.
They had a hero shooter, Quake Champions, come out in 2022
It was playable since 2017 though
Hopefully this means we get a new single player quake game.
Meanwhile we're still 10 years out from an announcement for a fallout sequel.
which will probably be another 76 type game.
cause infinite monetization is the way forward for games from big companies it seems.
God I hated 76.
That's OK. There are plenty of other developers that are worthwhile.
unfortunately they don't own and probably wont be able to access the licenses of my childhood properties that i love and want more of. 😭
Talk to your local politicians about copyright reform.
Death of the creator +70 years is absolutely absurd, and we only got here because of Disney repeatedly lobbying to make it longer specifically so that Mickey Mouse could be kept out of the public domain. (And now, Mickey is public domain, so can we finally give up on that?)
Instead, copyrights should only be valid for 20 years, just like patents.
Imagine if everything up to 2006 was public domain... Imagine the kinds of movies, books, and video games we might be getting if everyone was able to use the characters, story, world, etc of anything from 2006 or earlier. Imagine how much creativity has gone to waste because that's not yet possible. Fallout and Fallout 2 would already be public domain, freely available for others to do remakes of or sequels to. Fallout 3 would be public domain in 2 more years.
Then there's the software side, too. Every Windows version before Vista would be public domain, and Vista would become public domain this November. And then what about Microsoft Office? And Adobe Photoshop? Old -- but still usable -- versions of all kinds of software would become free, perhaps even with source code leaks/releases ... and that could also really help open-source software, especially when it comes to compatibility with (formerly) closed-source software.
(Plus, that would make copyrights and public domain much more easy to figure out and manage. Currently, it can be quite difficult to determine when a certain work is public domain or not, thanks to the timeline being based on the death of the creator. Not only do you need to know when the work was made, you also need to track down the creator and find out when they died ... which is sometimes very difficult for more obscure creators. If the timeline is instead based on when the work was first made, everything becomes very simple. Take today's date, subtract 20 years, and everything made before that date is free game. No need for further questions and investigation.)
It's insane that under the current system, something made by a young and long-lived creator could easily end up being copyright-protected (with a state-enforced monopoly) for 150 years or more. The whole country is only 250 years old! (It's difficult to verify, but entirely plausible that there may be works that were originally made in 1876 or even earlier, and still protected by copyright today.)
In most cases, the vast majority of the profits from a copyrighted work happen in the first 1 to 2 years. Most copyrighted works are earning little or no money after 5 years. So 20 years is already plenty generous, ample time for creators to make profit from their work and be rewarded for creating it. If you don't manage to cash in on your creation within 20 years, well -- too bad. The very few creators who lose out on money because of that are more than made up for by the societal benefit of being able to freely reproduce and remix all of these more recent IPs. It's the same as with patents -- you have 20 years to cash in on your invention and be rewarded for making it, and then it becomes public property to benefit everyone.
No, but you can find new things to love. Some may even be better than what you currently love.
Yeah, but its not the same man. and theres precious little in the Fallout and elder scrolls veins that are actually worth anything.
I think I've already watch the slow death of Fallout.
I agree.. Fallout 4 and 76 both kind of highlight the abandoning of what fallout is.
The only good Fallout products to come out in the Bethesda Ownership was New Vegas, and the TV Show.. Which I think tells a lot.
Try new stuff though! Have you played KCDII, for instance? Or BG3?
I grew up on ES and Fallout too, but the nostalgia kinda weakens once one witnesses how far AAA RPG sandboxes have come.
...Also, its entirely possible we get some fan ES/Fallout games modded into newer engines.
I've played, but never finished KCD 1, I want to play BG3, but its way to expensive.
Honestly I'm kinda fed up with AAA in general. Its nothing but trend chasing tripe, the same shit regurgitated over and over again, or.. in Starfields case, a glimmer of a good idea drowning under a fast fecal sea of stupid management and implementation.
Honestly I’m kinda fed up with AAA in general.
Don't be
Play BG3 when you can afford it. It's sublime.
So is KCD2. It's not really like KCDI, which was jank; on a technical level, and in terms of sheer polish and breadth, II is mind boggling. Its existence is an embarrassment to Bethesda.
Cyberpunk 2077, when modded to make it feel less bullet spongy, is also really something.
In other words, avoid AAAAs.
Play AAA gems. And AAs.
Fresh, "mid sized" studios are where gaming is at. I... don't really think I can go back, TBH.
I've been waiting for 3 years for the sale price to come down, but it refuses to go below 45.
and honestly, why should it, when hordes of people are still willing to pay 45 dollars on sale, theres no financial point in putting it on sale for 15.. and out of all the games on the market, its the only game I would say actually deserves the price with just how much fucking replayability and work they've put into it to account for every possible ludicrous decision and combination of decisions you could ever do.
Its just not a price my finances can allow.
No rush. Patient gaming is the way.
There are some "older" AA RPGs or 'cinematic RPGs' you may have missed though, like Stray, Outer Wilds. Or leaning into the "sandbox" direction, Starsector. These should be cheap by now.
Yeah, Definitely, and I got humble bundle.. I got a whole steam backlog full of unplayed humble bundle subscription games, If life ever stops being such a miserable cunt maybe i'll make a concerted effort to tackle the dreaded backlog.
The Wasteland series is what fallout was based from. The 3rd game is great. There's no reason to give bethsoft your money.
No, they’ll announce it next week, it won’t come out for 20 years though
Next month they will announce it with a 5 second video with text saying it's in development but will only come out around 2035.
Quake is an odd inclusion, right? I mean, I liked Quake Champions, but that released like eight years ago?
Fingers crossed that they go back to its roots. The atmosphere in the original was phenomenal and made such a great successor to the Doom franchise. While the latter has been resurrected quite well, we could hope for a similar treatment for Quake.
For me, at least 30% of the Quake appeal was the Nine Inch Nails soundtrack. It hit hard.
Absolutely a vital part of the atmosphere, which is why I chose that word. The music, the textures, the sound effects, the characters (as they were), all together creating a never-before-seen mood in an unprecedented 3D environment.
As a kid, Quake 2 was the only game which ever made me stop and be like "ok that's enough computer for today." I have no idea if it holds up, but it was very intense compared to the other shooters of the day.
I actually played it recently, and it's still decent, especially with some of the fan expansions. The original Quake absolutely holds up.
load more comments
(7 replies)
I had my fun with Starfield. May even play it more in the future. I couldn't care less if ever gets a sequel.
It simply doesn't have the franchise sauce that Fallout and ES have.
I thought everyone hated starfield? Maybe I should give it a shot.
Think they're going to fire Todd?
No, there are so many more Skyrim ports to finish!
New Skyrim port mentioned.
the consensus in the industry is that there isnt enough todd in the games. hes been spread too thin at bethesda
No, I think they're gonna go down with the Toddship
At least we got Fallout London.
Yeah, but, meh.. Its okay, but I think its a bit overhyped.
but maybe i'm a bit jaded after having to restart my game over half a dozen times because of game breaking bugs.
granted the latest version did clear up a lot of the issues, so i gotta give it that
Awesome idea, incredible effort, wrong engine, TBH.
It was already DOA
Huh.
view more: next ›