[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/v/ - Video Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: file.jpg (1.02 MB, 3840x2160)
1.02 MB
1.02 MB JPG
I clowned on Starfield comparing it to this game. But now after having actually played No Man's Sky for a few dozen hours I have to admit Starfield is the better game. No Man's Sky has so much jank to it and missing a lot of features. AI is retarded, dialogue sucks, no melee combat, gun combat is boring, there's no enemy variety somehow less than Starfield, platnets are just as samey, ships even with the new building are boring, flying is better having no load screens but that's about it.

Elite Dangerous and even Star Citizen are both better than Starfield and No Man's Sky but I do have to give Starfield credit for being better than No Man's Sky. I am sorry for shitting on your game Todd, it's only mostly bad.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.