• JJROKCZ
    link
    English
    51 year ago

    Yea that’s my main problem so far, I don’t understand how NMS and space engineers both allow seamless travel from space to atmosphere but this major studio game forces me to open up the map and select land. Hopefully a mod fixes it because this is pretty atrocious for $70

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      It’s an engine limitation. The Engine that Bethesda holds onto with an iron fist is what hampers their games.

      However, the opposite side of the coin is, that it makes them super easy to modify, so people can make their own additions. Because Starfield is using the same engine as Skyrim and Fallout 4.

      • Archmage Azor
        link
        English
        81 year ago

        I don’t know if a better, modded flight system would be possible really. That looks like something so ingrained into the foundation of Starfield it would have had to be changed during production

      • @c0c0c0
        link
        English
        71 year ago

        This is why I cut them slack. I’d rather have the clunky mechanics than lose the vibrant modding platform.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I haven’t played NMS, but watched a lot of videos regarding simulating planets, atmosphere (and transitioning to-from space) around the time it was hyped, and assumed that’s what NMS is doing. Which is (maybe? I haven’t played) why you can walk around the whole planet, and take off and turn around and see that same planet from space without loading, etc.

      NMS as I understand it is a simulation first, sandbox second.

      Starfield sounds like Spacerim if anything, with instanced planets that are separate from space. At ground level, planets are just flat planes and you only explore a small, generated chunk at one loaded instance. It’s not actually a spherical planet when on the ground.