288

Starfield's first DLC is one of the worst Bethesda DLCs of all time (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by Buttflapper@lemmy.world to c/games@lemmy.world

167 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Starfield steam page for the DLC currently shows eight user review score of 41%, making this one of the worst Bethesda DLC's released of all time. This is so horribly, shockingly bad for Bethesda, because it shows as a gaming company, they are no longer capable of delivering a really good gaming experience as they had in the past. Some of the reviews sum up quite nicely what is wrong with this DLC....

Less content than any skyrim DLC. Less than The Fallout 4 story DLCs. Doesn't change of the complaints people had with the base game, writing is still at a 4th grade level.

Quick: If you are looking to buy my answer is no, you aren't missing much content. I was really hoping to enjoy this DLC. Took about 4 hours for the main story and maybe 2 more hours to 100% the achievements.

These two reviews I think really summed up what Starfield has become, $70 for an AAAA title that has extremely little buy-in from the community, horrifically low amount of replayability and can be breezed through easily. It's mind-boggling to see this

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 42 points 1 month ago

(cough) Horse Armor (cough)

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/horse-armor

[-] Glytch@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

This was exactly my first thought. Not surprised that the pioneers of shitty dlc made shitty dlc.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 month ago

Yeah...

Basically every Oblivion DLC that was not Shivering Isles (and MAYBE Heroes of The Nine or whatever) was god awful. And Fallout 3 (aside from the last two hours of the story DLC) was only really tolerated because it was mostly sold as a season pass. Operation Anchorage was a cool novelty that made stealth trivial and the rest... existed.

[-] pancakes@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

I would argue that all the fo3 and oblivion DLC were decent. Some obviously better than others, but they weren't just soulless cash grabs. They had effort go into them, and were fairly new into the DLC space so some trial and error is to be expected. They had a pretty good amount of content for the price relative to the base game, compared to the starfield DLC/ current AAA norms.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 month ago

According to UESP, Oblivion had

Orrery: A few spells and a player house with a fetch quest attached
Wizard's Tower: a mage player house with a few spells and a fetch quest
Thieves Den: A few spells and items and a very small dungeon
Mehrunes' Razor: Decent sized dungeon to get a dagger
Vile Lair: A few spells, a player house, and a fetch quest
Spell Tomes: Literally just spells
Fighter's Stronghold: A short dungeon and, you got it, another player house

Then we have Knights of the Nine (really mediocre) and Shivering Isle (arguably the best DLC Bethesda ever made)

Oh. And...

MOTHA FUGGING HORSE ARMOR!!!!!

People tend to be more favorable to Fallout 3's DLC than I am (most are incredibly tiny dungeons but with a new tileset). I suspect in large part because Operation Anchorage channeled how amazing storming the memorial was in the base game and... I genuinely don't know why people are so obsessed with flipping The Pitt. And Broken Steel itself was one of the worse examples of "We'll finish the game later" of the era... and I played ALL the Blizzard games.

[-] pancakes@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

To me, it wasn't so much about each DLC making a huge impact or the story being amazing. It was more about already playing the game to death and then gaining access to more content to explore. Kind of like eating a delicious cake, still being hungry, and then finding another slice of that cake that was sitting out all day.