Bethesda has never said 6 million copies sold. It’s 6 million players, including game pass. All we can glean from this is they have sold less than 6 million copies, though we don’t know the exact number. Still, Starfield is dominating the sales charts, so it’s still doing well. How well isn’t known, but I don’t have any doubt that it will be sufficiently profitable over its lifetime. Even that dumpster fire of Cyberpunk was very successful. Marketing is sometimes more important than building your game.
Oh I was being generous with the 6 million copies thing. They won't release sales numbers so we have to guess. That in itself is a sign that it's not doing well, or they would be broadcasting that info far and wide.
Originally Posted by WizardGnome
As for the rest of your post, I mean look. It seems to me like a lot of people are really INVESTED in the idea Starfield must fail. Like, they WANT the outcome to be that it fails, independent of what the actual facts are, and often in spite of not having actually played the game themselves. It honestly seems very strange to me. I DON'T actually see any evidence that Starfield is getting torn to pieces. I think we're probably going to need to wait more than a week from release to let the dust settle and see how it actually does.
It's more complicated than that. I want companies with AAA resources and development teams to release products that reflect that. I want those companies held to account by the gaming community when they fall short. It would be dishonest to say that I don't feel some sense of joy when those games fail or are panned as Starfield has been. AS for waiting - time is NOT on Bethesda's side on this one. People report that the more they play the less they like the game and marketing becomes less effective over time.
Originally Posted by WizardGnome
I also think you've got an odd idea of what Larian is going to do. BG3 was never a "let's transition to using DnD rules from now on" proposition or a "We're just going to make DnD games from now on" proposition. I fully expect they'll move back to their own custom systems after this. I also think you are giving Larian way too much credit. The beginning of this game is very fun and polished. The end of this game is untested, the combat falls apart, has awful writing, and is buggy in a way that would *never in a thousand years* be forgiven if a larger studio released a game in the same state. Larian did not set some grand example with BG3. It has some very fun highs, but this is the game that actually convinced me to never buy a Larian game on release ever again. They too consistently drop the ball on the second half of their games.
I am not in total agreement here. Yes, work needs to be done on Bg3, especially ACT 3 and the Multiplayer system, as well as Modding tools. However, the bones of the game are very strong, and - unlike Starfield - I can see, feel and hear the work that was put into Bg3. I am confident that within 6 months to a year we will have a more polished game with additional features at no cost.
When playing Starfield I am left wondering what a company like Bethesda with a larger development team, and more resources than Larian was doing for the last six years. I don't see 6 years and 450 devs worth of work. If a team of 20-30 devs had made this game I would be impressed - but they probably would have made better basic core design choices as well.
Also how is it that a handful of modders have developed a UI that is 1000% better in less than a week (it doesn't solve the core problems but it makes vast improvements)? Why are those people not working for Bethesda?
