https://twitter.com/CultureCrave/status/1706212465099542845?t=ElnaPD7tlqwfDb_mrNwJTg&s=19

#Starfield rating has dropped below #Fallout76 on SteamDB

It is now the lowest-rated Bethesda game ever pic.twitter.com/enOArwKokK

— Culture Crave ðŸ�¿ (@CultureCrave) September 25, 2023

so user scores and reviews matter now?

Mostly Positive Yikes...

Quinn said 🔗 so user scores and reviews matter now?

You shoulda have blurred out the 87.

Starfield is at 84.

It's a good game imo but a big let down from what was promised.

Not anything great but still a fun game.

SPdaGOAT said 🔗 You shoulda have blurred out the 87. Starfield is at 84.

Starfield moved from 83 back to 84 coz of Reviewers like this...

PlayStation literally have Xbox trolls with official websites reviewing their games... The scales are not tipped the same... That's why PS always have more review scores... The ppl on the PlayStation side dont bother reviewing Xbox games coz they have better sh1t to play... Thats why they only get half of the ppl to review their games and a bunch of mfs with the name Xbox in them

Pleasure Boy said 🔗 Starfield moved from 83 back to 84 coz of Reviewers like this... PlayStation literally have Xbox trolls with official websites reviewing their games... The scales are not tipped the same... That's why PS always have more review scores... The ppl on the PlayStation side dont bother reviewing Xbox games coz they have better sh1t to play... Thats why they only get half of the ppl to review their games and a bunch of mfs with the name Xbox in them

Honest question bro. How can you be this big of a ******? I’m genuinely curious.

KlimSenobi said 🔗 Honest question bro. How can you be this big of a ******? I’m genuinely curious.

On God I be wondering the same thing. sh1t is astounding honestly.

Pleasure Boy said 🔗 Starfield moved from 83 back to 84 coz of Reviewers like this... PlayStation literally have Xbox trolls with official websites reviewing their games... The scales are not tipped the same... That's why PS always have more review scores... The ppl on the PlayStation side dont bother reviewing Xbox games coz they have better sh1t to play... Thats why they only get half of the ppl to review their games and a bunch of mfs with the name Xbox in them

I did notice there was an overwhelming amount of those high 90 reviews with "xbox" in the title of the publication...

It's a shame they're allowed to manipulate sh1t like that but I think it's pretty widely accepted by all the normies that the game is a mid-8. A good game, but not a great game.

Cyberpunk overtook Starfield this weekend on the steam charts, and that's just with a major patch. I'm not sure Starfield is going to be able to weather the next round of Q4 drops.

Fauby said 🔗 It's a good game imo but a big let down from what was promised. Not anything great but still a fun game.

Honest question, not trolling, what do you feel the game is missing or isn't hitting the mark of what you expected?

Pleasure Boy said 🔗 Starfield moved from 83 back to 84 coz of Reviewers like this... PlayStation literally have Xbox trolls with official websites reviewing their games... The scales are not tipped the same... That's why PS always have more review scores... The ppl on the PlayStation side dont bother reviewing Xbox games coz they have better sh1t to play... Thats why they only get half of the ppl to review their games and a bunch of mfs with the name Xbox in them

game is too big for its own good....i just ended up fast traveling everywhere

Starfield might be the greatest bad game ever created. if that makes sense lol

imthatinfamous said 🔗 game is too big for its own good....i just ended up fast traveling everywhere

that was my main complaint on top of the fact that they didn't seem to put much thought into the characters or storylines...its all very predictable and typical.

It becomes even more obvious when you switch over to other story-drive RPGs and realize how quickly they try to hook you with their narrative and characters.

That's what made New Vegas so good IMO, and part of what made Fallout 4 not so good. Fallout 4 redeemed itself a little bit with it's companion characters though.

KlimSenobi said 🔗 Honest question bro. How can you be this big of a ******? I’m genuinely curious.

They struck a new deal to end the writer strike and you’re still mad at the world cause a stranger posted what you regard as bad news about a plastic electronics box

The control Xbox has over your mental health is astounding and sad. You need to seek help

God bless

God Bless You said 🔗 They struck a new deal to end the writer strike and you’re still mad at the world cause a stranger posted what you regard as bad news about a plastic electronics box The control Xbox has over your mental health is astounding and sad. You need to seek help God bless

My n1gga what the fu#k are you talking about?

Pleasure Boy said 🔗 Starfield moved from 83 back to 84 coz of Reviewers like this... PlayStation literally have Xbox trolls with official websites reviewing their games... The scales are not tipped the same... That's why PS always have more review scores... The ppl on the PlayStation side dont bother reviewing Xbox games coz they have better sh1t to play... Thats why they only get half of the ppl to review their games and a bunch of mfs with the name Xbox in them

Starfield only hit 83 because of reviewers like this

These are the people you ride for?

KlimSenobi said 🔗 My n1gga what the fu#k are you talking about?

Your mental illness

Please seek counseling

God bless

Krazie said 🔗 Starfield only hit 83 because of reviewers like this These are the people you ride for?

Idk about all that.

PCMag - 70
GameSpot - 70
IGN - 70
Digital Trends - 70
Eurogamer - 60
Game Informer - 85
PC Gamer - 75
VG247 - 80
Hardcore Gamer - 80


Meanwhile like...12 of 30 or so reviews in the 90's come from Xbox or Microsoft-focused publications. And even more are a little too over the top to be reliable (looking at you Gamingbible).

So...you have the more reputable media outlets (even removing IGN) out there giving it mid scores (to be fair I think Game informer is the most accurate) while almost half of the 90+ come from fanboy outlets...

Idk if you can rely on that single 4/10 screenshot to act like its a bunch of weirdos and goofballs blog writers who are review bombing as a counter to the payola and bias argument.

The more non-bias outlets have a relatively close consensus on the game...

Banner said 🔗 Idk about all that. PCMag - 70 GameSpot - 70 IGN - 70 Digital Trends - 70 Eurogamer - 60 Game Informer - 85 PC Gamer - 75 VG247 - 80 Hardcore Gamer - 80 Meanwhile like...12 of 30 or so reviews in the 90's come from Xbox or Microsoft-focused publications. And even more are a little too over the top to be reliable (looking at you Gamingbible). So...you have the more reputable media outlets (even removing IGN) out there giving it mid scores (to be fair I think Game informer is the most accurate) while almost half of the 90+ come from fanboy outlets... Idk if you can rely on that single 4/10 screenshot to act like its a bunch of weirdos and goofballs blog writers who are review bombing as a counter to the payola and bias argument. The more non-bias outlets have a relatively close consensus on the game...

4/10 dropped it a whole point.. You and OP's type of people the only ones giving out a 4/10

Krazie said 🔗 Starfield only hit 83 because of reviewers like this These are the people you ride for?

You have more hours in Disney Dreamlight Valley than Starfield bro. You ride harder for bi#ches like this than any of us.

Kahlua said 🔗 Mostly Positive Yikes...

You miss one lil bro

Kewop Decam said 🔗 Honest question, not trolling, what do you feel the game is missing or isn't hitting the mark of what you expected?

I'm gonna sound like a broken record but not trolling here at all but I was expecting seamless travel. Todd mentioned that multiple times. Now even without that, that is honestly fine.

The loading screens are very terrible imo and ki1ls the feeling of the game. That's my biggest issue. Need to get rid of most of the menus. Keep some but they can get rid of ALOT of loading screens/menus. They have loading screens to access other menus .

The AI is not good at all. The enemy ai mostly just stands in a spot and they like sponges that need to shoot 400 times to ki1l them. You can basically stand in one spot and ki1l all them without worrying about moving.

The game is fun and these are things they can easily fix imo and I don't believe they should rely so heavily on the Mods to fix/ implement these basic things.

Also, to be able to have some type of rover on the ground would be useful.

Again I enjoy the game but to me it's not on the Level of what I was expecting, which sucks cuz I have been hype for this game for like 6 years now.


Edit: so far the game seems to have "go fetch this and bring it back" story lines. Y'all make fun of Death Stranding as a walking simulator when this game is a watered down version of that.

Imo, they shouldn't have done 1000 planets. Should have only done 100 and put more details into them. Some of the planet layouts of buildings are copy and pasted over to other planets

Krazie said 🔗 4/10 dropped it a whole point.. You and OP's type of people the only ones giving out a 4/10

My post literally said I think 85 is the correct score...

I promise you one 4/10 from some random outlet isn't going to have nearly as much of an impact as the nine objective gaming publications that gave it between a 70-85.

4/10 dropped it one point...ok take that out of the equation and it's still a mid-8

Which isn't even a bad rating, but for some reason yall can't stop crying if somebody says Starfield isn't a 95 or higher...

and your whole point was that the only reason Starfield is in the mid-8's is because of weirdo review bombers giving it a 4/10.

I showed you 9 different major publications that aren't known for leaning one way or the other in the console war, who gave the game between a 70 and 85...so no, it's not just random weirdo blogs giving it low scores that led to its 84.

It's the fact that it simply did not impress enough reviewers...

Honest question and please answer because it actually matters here:

Have you played Starfield yet?

don't run away or change the topic...have you played the game? Yes or No? I'm not talking "yeah I played a little at my friends house." I mean have you sat down, on your own, and really played the game for an extended period of time to fully give it a shot and be able to think critically about the game. Have you done that? Yes or no?

Banner said 🔗 My post literally said I think 85 is the correct score... I promise you one 4/10 from some random outlet isn't going to have nearly as much of an impact as the nine objective gaming publications that gave it between a 70-85. 4/10 dropped it one point...ok take that out of the equation and it's still a mid-8 Which isn't even a bad rating, but for some reason yall can't stop crying if somebody says Starfield isn't a 95 or higher... and your whole point was that the only reason Starfield is in the mid-8's is because of weirdo review bombers giving it a 4/10. I showed you 9 different major publications that aren't known for leaning one way or the other in the console war, who gave the game between a 70 and 85...so no, it's not just random weirdo blogs giving it low scores that led to its 84. It's the fact that it simply did not impress enough reviewers... Honest question and please answer because it actually matters here: Have you played Starfield yet? don't run away or change the topic...have you played the game? Yes or No? I'm not talking "yeah I played a little at my friends house." I mean have you sat down, on your own, and really played the game for an extended period of time to fully give it a shot and be able to think critically about the game. Have you done that? Yes or no?

I dont like you, but I’ll answer you to save that man some time

He has as much time on starfield as me and OP combined