In reality, there is (almost) no force to reduce speed in space.

It was quite unituitive to me in the beginning that when I boost the spaceship, it works lke a car on earth rather than a spaceship. I’d have liked the spaceship to continue to gain speed when either the boost was applied or you continue to throttle the engine. They could have kept a fuel limit to keep the speed in check.

What are your thoughts on this? Would you have liked this to be more based in reality or prefer the familiar car based speed/acceleration that’s in the game?

46 points

I expect the developers chose this to make sure the casual user is going to enjoy the game first than aiming for accurate physics.

Most people would likely struggle with piloting the spaceship if they’d have to consider proper inertia and momentum.

It would be nice to have the option for it, maybe a mod idea?

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Agreed. It feels the same to me as the fighters in Star Wars Squadrons, which is familiar and comfortable.

I can appreciate a goal of realism, but it definitely feels like a hard balancing act with fun. I mean… When I get shot in the game I don’t actually die either, haha.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yeah I think that’s the basis for that decision as well. They already have simulation in letting us assign powers to different components, this addition would have felt like the real thing to me!

Definitely, someone will make a mod. Alas, I’m on Xbox.

Personally what would you prefer? I’m trying to gauge the sentiment in this community

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Xbox supports mods. It won’t support everything, especially mods that require a script extender, so hopefully you’ll be able to benefit from a more accurate space navigation mod at some point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Oh, I didn’t know that. That’s going to be fun!

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Personally I prefer the arcade-y feeling for that kind of game.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

A similar gripe: if I leave a planet, post-cutscene, the game points me back at that planet, thrusters on.

Why the hell would I be facing towards the thing I just left?

I can get around a lot of other immersion issues by making sure I walk into my ship and sit myself in the cockpit before trips. But why. the. hell. am I facing the planet I just left.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

Pretty framing, mostly, I assume. Alternatively you’d just be facing black space. It looks prettier to show you the planet you were on since it’s visually interesting and allows you to scan it quickly and decide if you want to land at any other POI on the planet instead of leaving. Leaving isnt much more difficult, either.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Do wish the flight controls felt a bit more like Elite or even Space Engineers. But it’s amazing they have vehicles and space flight at all on this engine.

The game simulates counter thrust (inertial dampening) so you don’t just float away. It would be nice to have this turned off optionally.

The fuel is the weirdest shit. The tutorial made it seem like a way bigger deal than it is. You don’t even have to buy the stuff. It automatically refills after each jump and costs nothing. It’s just a really piss poor artificial way of limiting your single jump range. Could have just as easily been an arbitrary number on the drive instead.

permalink
report
reply
14 points
*

Starfield has some pretty soft scifi under a hard veneer. It’s more a Star Trek/Wars than a The Expanse. I think there’s deceleration to add to a more arcade-y feel. If it bothers you it can be explained by your ship firing retrothrusters when the throttle isn’t engaged.

Though I would like an Elite Dangerous-style button to turn off Flight Assist

permalink
report
reply
1 point

I mean, you can also hear sound in the external space view. The Expanse also had sound in space, and it’s trying to be “harder” sci-fi.

The sounds within the craft in Starfield sound great, and admittedly it would be weird to have the external view fall silent, however more accurate it would be.

It’s a game, and there will always be tradeoffs for ease of play and general entertainment value.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I hadn’t noticed that they fire up retro thrusters. That’s a good attention to detail.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I don’t think they do, you have to imagine it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

🫠

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

if I remember right I think ships slowed down in the expanse also without thrust haha, Im pretty sure noticing the same thing when watching that show

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

When they were in space I only remember seeing them slowing down either when using RCS or after a flip so their engines are decelerating them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I immediately thought “piloting” felt like paddling a bathtub while trying to use an abacus with the other hand. The physics and just “feel” of piloting are awful to me, and I’m basing that on ancient space sims like Freelancer. Did they play any other space game throughout history before making this?

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Haha, your analogy is spot on! I think it’s still fun but my ‘science’ brain gets quite conflicted when piloting it.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Starfield

!starfield@lemmy.zip

Create post

Welcome to the Starfield community on Lemmy.zip!

  • Follow instance rules (no spam, keep it civil and respectful, be constructive, tag NSFW)

Helpful links:

Spoiler policy:

  • No spoilers in titles; if you want to share images with spoilers, preferably post the image in the body of the post. If you do make an image post, mark it NSFW.
  • Add [Spoilers] to your title if there will be untagged spoilers in the post.
  • Game mechanics and general discoveries (ship parts, weapons, etc) don’t need a spoiler tag.
  • Details about questlines and other story related content are spoilers. Use your best judgement!

Post & comment spoiler syntax:

::: spoiler 
<spoiler here>
:::

Community stats

  • 57

    Monthly active users

  • 395

    Posts

  • 4.4K

    Comments

Community moderators