440°

Todd Howard says that Bethesda is "putting the finishing touches on Starfield"

From Games Radar: "Starfield, Bethesda's first new IP in 25 years was recently delayed from November 11, 2022, and given a TBC 2023 release window. Naturally, this made some players worry about how production was progressing on what is arguably the most anticipated upcoming Xbox Series X games. Thankfully, Bethesda Game Studios' game director and executive producer confirmed that the studio has almost completed its work on the game, during a media briefing ahead of E3 2022: "We're putting the finishing touches on Starfield, which is an incredible opportunity for us," says Howard.

Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer also says that he believes Starfield will be seen as a "hallmark" of the ZeniMax Media acquisition, which was completed in March 2021 and brought teams like Arkane, Bethesda, MachineGames, and id Software into Xbox Game Studios.

"Starfield for me is a unique opportunity. Todd Howard has been a friend for an awful long time, and the fact that Bethesda Game Studios is working on a new IP, which has been a long time [coming]... This will be a hallmark for us – in terms of the acquisition of ZeniMax, getting to work with Todd, and bringing this game to market." "

Read Full Story >>
gamesradar.com
Christopher723d ago

Nothing new or worthwhile past the title. The rest of what they say is usual marketing jargon we hear almost weekly as it is.

SullysCigar723d ago

Thanks for saving me the time.

Tbh, my instinct was to stop reading after "Todd Howard says" given what's transpired in the past.

VenomUK722d ago

Something doesn't add up. If the game is genuinely having the 'finishing touches' added (meaning near-complete and having final tuning adjustments) then surely it should meet the original 11th November release date? Does this mean Starfield was prematurely delayed by Microsoft out of an abundance of caution following the Halo Infinite criticism and it will actually surprise everything at its 'E3' presentation with a release this year?

Obscure_Observer722d ago

"Tbh, my instinct was to stop reading after "Todd Howard says" given what's transpired in the past."

And yet here you are for a game that is nothing but his idea, concept, executive production, direction and overall vision. :/

Not sure who should be trusted this days.

porkChop722d ago

@Venom
"If the game is genuinely having the 'finishing touches' added (meaning near-complete and having final tuning adjustments) then surely it should meet the original 11th November release date?"

Bethesda have a track record of releasing buggy games and fixing them after launch. With the Xbox acquisition they could maybe be looking to turn a new leaf. So maybe Bethesda and Xbox want to delay it and avoid the usual launch issues.

Also since this is a current gen-only game they might want to take extra time to optimize performance and polish up the graphics. I'm sure they want Starfield to be a showcase and the start of a new era for Bethesda.

722d ago
VenomUK722d ago

@porkChop Yes, you’re likely right. The game could be done and the rest of the time is big squeaking and optimisation. But I will still be keeping my fingers crossed until Sunday that there could be a good surprise!

anubusgold722d ago

@VenomUK Have you played their games they are always full of bugs that they have to patch out later . Like the oblivion infinite gold glitch, or the copy item glitch or the flying glitch most of their glitches are fun and break the game but bethesda always goes back and patches out the fun bugs.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 722d ago
crazyCoconuts722d ago

Isn't the release date now 1H23? Is he referring to the finishing touches for the demo this weekend?

Christopher722d ago

With the scope of this game, I'm assuming they mean that the core/foundation/main outline of the game is set in stone and they are now "cleaning it up and adding/fixing side stuff." So, no more major development that will change the game from what it is, just finishing content, fixing bugs, and optimizing engine elements.

Zhipp722d ago

Polishing on a game like this takes a really long time. I heard it was content-complete back when the last teaser released. If they weren't already "putting the finishing touches" right now, then I wouldnt expect a release until late 2023 at the earliest

neutralgamer1992722d ago

Less talking more showing simple as that. I am not saying he is lying but it's past due now, at this rate will not get another fallout till 2030

VenomCarnage89722d ago

They're creating more bugs so the game doesn't launch with too few of them

dumahim722d ago

Todd Howard fits right in with the rest of the empty talking heads at MS.

Also, finishing touches? Didn't it get delayed to next year?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 722d ago
723d ago Replies(1)
Bhuahahaha723d ago

they putting on the finishing touches and leave the bug fixing to the modders 😁

DarXyde722d ago

Honestly, you're probably right. Damn near a certainty.

It makes you wonder though. Why delay if we're talking about finishing touches? Sounds like they were told not to release it yet. Eke out more from game pass subs before releasing? That has become my default assumption for all things Microsoft.

Obscure_Observer722d ago

"Honestly, you're probably right. Damn near a certainty."

Don´t be ridiculous. They´re first party now. They carry the Xbox brand now. There´ll be bugs as every single open world game has. Let alone a game of such unprecedented scale, Bethesda biggest game thus far. So yes, to have bugs is a given.

But to say that MS will allow Bethesda to leave the game broken to modders to fix, is disingenuous af.

SullysCigar722d ago

Perhaps they delayed it because Ragnarok is coming...?

DarXyde722d ago (Edited 722d ago )

Obscure_Observer,

"Don´t be ridiculous. They´re first party now. They carry the Xbox brand now."

Never have I ever felt that Microsoft has ever been that concerned about their reputation in gaming. Nintendo, absolutely. They use to do the whole 'Nintendo Seal of Quality' thing. Their games are still quite polished. Playstation games haven't had many issues to my recollection, though I do remember some weird stuff happening in The Last of Us Remastered in terms of glitches.

"There´ll be bugs as every single open world game has. Let alone a game of such unprecedented scale, Bethesda biggest game thus far. So yes, to have bugs is a given."

Here we go, setting the narrative for the issues that are coming. It's almost like you know there will be issues and you're already dismissing them because the game is so grandiose and ambitious. Maybe you should see actual gameplay before coming to that conclusion based on what Todd Howard (of all people!) says, yeah? Let's take the people involved at their word for a moment... Bethesda could never manage to get their act together on smaller scales... And you think they're going to magically improve with a bigger scale? On new hardware? Ok.

"But to say that MS will allow Bethesda to leave the game broken to modders to fix, is disingenuous af."

Didn't it take them a month to fix shooting in not just a shooter, but the shooter that is the identity of the Xbox brand? You don't have to go that far back to find an example of administrative negligence. Honestly, I don't know where this unfounded optimism comes from. What is Microsoft going to do if they don't fix the problems? Fire people? Close the studio?

It's Bethesda. As long as they push out profitable games, I doubt Microsoft cares.

Obscure_Observer722d ago (Edited 722d ago )

"Never have I ever felt that Microsoft has ever been that concerned about their reputation in gaming."

The way you feel about Microsoft really doesn´t matter when the numbers are against you. So feel free to fight it:

https://www.metacritic.com/...

"Here we go, setting the narrative for the issues that are coming. It's almost like you know there will be issues and you're already dismissing them because the game is so grandiose and ambitious."

There´re absolutely ZERO open world game that is glitch/bug-free at release date, ZERO! If you don´t know that by now, you know nothing about open world games.

"Bethesda could never manage to get their act together on smaller scales... And you think they're going to magically improve with a bigger scale? On new hardware? Ok."

This is nothing but natural evolution. Todd Howard is a veteran developer and Starfield is gonna be amazing. If Starfield turn out to be worst than Fallout 4, then I´ll get back to you and admit that you were right all along.

Now, the question is: Would you do the same or would you play coy and hide behind hypocrisy? Time will tell.

"Honestly, I don't know where this unfounded optimism comes from."

Maybe because the initial lineup of Xbox Series games has better metascores and overall gamer´s reviews than Xbox One´s. Quality is definitely improving, but feel free and deny facts.

"It's Bethesda. As long as they push out profitable games, I doubt Microsoft cares."

If that´s was the case, Starfield would be released on Playstation, it would be a live service game and Microsoft would released that game ready or not to please investors, shareholders and the board of directors instead of face them and delay the game.

But that´s not the case at all, is it? If you want to downplay Microsoft, at least speak sense.

DarXyde722d ago

Obscure_Observer,

I'm gonna light you up now.

"The way you feel about Microsoft really doesn´t matter when the numbers are against you. So feel free to fight it:

https://www.metacritic.com/...

Speaking of disingenuous, if your point is to say that they outperformed Sony according to metacritic, I sure hope so. Considering most of last year's Sony published lineup were rereleases, they better. Last year simply wasn't a good year for PlayStation. Microsoft had an unusually good year, but this year will be a better comparison. Sony is releasing big games this year and Microsoft has bought enough publishers where I can't imagine they won't have big games launch this year.

"There´re absolutely ZERO open world game that is glitch/bug-free at release date, ZERO! If you don´t know that by now, you know nothing about open world games."

This is a muppet take if I've ever seen one and you're blatantly misrepresenting my point. Where do I even imply that it is possible to launch without bugs? I'm telling you that Bethesda is very well known for their problems. They are literally called "Bugthesda". My point is, if they can't even manage their current worlds well, what makes you think expanding the scope and scale will be manageable because Microsoft owns them now? It's mental and unfounded.

"This is nothing but natural evolution. Todd Howard is a veteran developer and Starfield is gonna be amazing. If Starfield turn out to be worst than Fallout 4, then I´ll get back to you and admit that you were right all along."

Umm... Todd Howard is a veteran. Sure. But I have to ask if we're talking about the same Todd Howard. He's not exactly known for modesty or releasing games in pristine condition.

"Now, the question is: Would you do the same or would you play coy and hide behind hypocrisy? Time will tell."

It's almost like this bloke isn't even paying attention... I'm very open in my praise of Xbox when it's warranted and my criticism of playstation and Nintendo when it's warranted. Go find some hot takes I've had about PlayStation or Nintendo. Not a challenging undertaking, Mr. "In Phil we trust."

"Maybe because the initial lineup of Xbox Series games has better metascores and overall gamer´s reviews than Xbox One´s. Quality is definitely improving, but feel free and deny facts."

Love the assumptions, lad. You're doing great. No one's denying that, but I think many gamers contend that's a very low bar. And again with the metascores. Play your games and grow an opinion of your own, yeah?

"If that´s was the case, Starfield would be released on Playstation, it would be a live service game and Microsoft would released that game ready or not to please investors, shareholders and the board of directors instead of face them and delay the game.

But that´s not the case at all, is it? If you want to downplay Microsoft, at least speak sense."

Counterpoint: it is an exclusive that is going to be day one on game pass. Ecosystem buy-in+recurring sub and you've got the benefit of a live service game. I also don't think it's going to be a forever exclusive. I genuinely don't. If anything, a delay is a sign that it's not as far along as they say or my Microsoft senses are that they are content to delay content until they get more game pass subs or receive some arbitrary revenue goal.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 722d ago
Skywalker333722d ago

@DarXyde, FYI the Nintendo Seal of Quality had nothing to do with the quality of the game, it only meant that that game and publisher/developer had gotten the licence from Nintendo to publish this game at their console.
They did it because a lot of companies were publishing games back then without getting official licence (extremely common during the atari, 8bit and 16bit era from many MANY companies). So the seal of quality didn't really mean anything more apart from the publisher paying for the licence. But it was a nice marketing trick that made the people believe that anything with the seal was of high quality :)

Just a piece of gaming history because you mentioned it, thats all. Carry on ;)

DarXyde721d ago

You know the strange thing about this?

I knew that and I entirely forgot that. Cheers for pointing that out though, mate.

SinisterKieran722d ago

todd howard speaking is always a mistake.

LoveSpuds722d ago

Yup, who honestly listens to a word out of that guys mouth at this point.....other than Obscure Observer obviously 🙄

Gardenia722d ago

I have a funny feeling this game isn't going to be good.

Wrex369722d ago (Edited 722d ago )

AKA Phil flew out there probably saw the build, asked if they were confident, and Todd in a former self would have felt pressure to say yes from Zenimax, now was just honest with Phil about the current confidence with the general devs because if Phil allows Halo, one of the major tent poles for Xbox, to get delayed to get to a better place before launch then you can bet Todd felt like he could ask for a delay too. End of story.

AmUnRa722d ago

And Halo is still a mess...

722d ago
Wrex369722d ago

Depends who you ask really. Haven't played it so I don't know but I know it was delayed.

dumahim722d ago

Yeah, that totally fits the MS hands off policy we've been hearing about for so long.

Wrex369722d ago

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not because it's n4g but yeah, they generally let their devs do their thing now.

Show all comments (75)
260°

Days Gone Director Says Bend's Project Costs Over $250M; Says PS Co-CEO Doesn't Want 2 Zombies Games

Days Gone director claims Sony has already poured in at least a $250M in Bend's project; says Days Gone sold more than Death Stranding.

shinoff218319h ago

Well that sucks. Seems they want more online trash. I'd rather of had the sequel if it was single player

MrNinosan5h ago

What online trash games did PS Studios release last 10 years?

Notellin3h ago

The past has nothing to do with the future. This is such a terrible argument. Everyone knows about their current live service push.

_SilverHawk_1h ago

It's so tragic what happened to days gone. It is such an amazing game but bandwagoners trashed it and it underperformed in it's launch year. Days gone is the best open world zombie game released in the past five years. I was recently playing it on pc and I'm still amazed by it.

Games are very expensive to make and it seems like it's normal for a AAA game to cost over a quarter billion to make so if a quality game like days gone greatly underperforms then people shouldn't be upset when they see a lot of GAAS. I still remember a lot of bandwagoners calling days gone trash but years later it's now amazing when it's considered a failure by sony.

If a game isn't the best thing seen since hats with pockets then a lot of gamers who haven't played it automatically calls it rubbish and whoever made it should be incarcerated

Cacabunga37m ago(Edited 36m ago)

Co CEO prefers gamers to boycott.. so be it. I’ll never buy a gaas.
Just imagine buying a game you cannot replay in some years.. this shit must stop.

Days Gone did zombies in a very original way. The story was also so engaging. You actually only meet Zombie hordes later in the game. There are many more enemy groups to deal with.

-Foxtrot19h ago

It would be a shame if it was true that Hermen never gave the franchise a chance simply because he didn't like it and they already had a "Zombie" game with TLOU.

NaughtyDog are most likely moving onto a new IP next so it would have been the perfect time to do it.

ThinkThink11h ago

Here's where xbox steps in and releases state of decay 3 day and date on ps5.

Grilla4h ago

Days gone 2 was canceled before Herman was in charge. That happened like 4 years ago.

vfl5234h ago

4 years ago he was head of Playstation Studios. He would've probably had a hand in the cancelation.

Notellin3h ago

Man two seconds of research could have saved you from this comment. Amazing work Grilla you fit in with the uniformed N4G community who speaks before verifying anything that they say.

Redemption-641h ago

Maybe encourage people to buy the game at full price and not when it's heavily discounted or go on plus. If this game had sold well when it was full priced a sequel would have been in the works. They made a single-player game that most people didn't support until they dropped the price.

Cacabunga18m ago

The guy’s just a moron.. he should have stayed within game development. His choices will have a terrible impact on the brand in the long run.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 18m ago
excaliburps5h ago

Yep. Kind of weird since it wasn't a sales flop, no?

I know we have to take what Ross says with a grain of salt since we're hearing just one side of the story, but even so, the game wasn't bad at all. Heck, it's my brother's favorite last-gen game from what I recall.

The amount of zombies on screen, imagine that with the PS5 and SSD? That would be insanely fun!

Grilla4h ago

Most copies were sold on sale. Not enough ppl bought it at full price. I paid 20$ for it 6 -7 months after release.

Notellin3h ago(Edited 3h ago)

Yeah we should never believe the creators side until we hear the corporate/big business side as history has shown we should always believe billion dollar corporations.

What a bootlicker statement.

P_Bomb5h ago

Well I don’t want 10 live service games, but they have no problem doing that lol. Ugh.

CrimsonWing694h ago(Edited 4h ago)

Oh great so we only get what the big wigs want… y’know, the people that really have their fingers on the pulse of what their consumers want. Faaaaantastic!

rippermcrip1h ago

Well consider they know the sales... they do know what the consumer wants.

It sold shit.

Show all comments (35)
240°

Trying to push players over from PC to console is a terrible idea, PlayStation

As PlayStation announces its new strategy to encourage PC users to choose PS5 it is a bitter-sweet moment for PC gamers.

Christopher21h ago

I mean, it's a business based on hardware market. Do we expect them to not even try? It's not like Nintendo doesn't do the same by not putting any games on PC and Microsoft until recently did the same. I don't care what they attempt, as long as they don't abuse the community or lie about their goals/requirements.

Will it work? Not likely. Should we care? No. Let them waste their time, it doesn't affect anything.

RaidenBlack20h ago

let them try ... at the end of the day, we get few extra PC games ... yay ... and also promotes game preservation via PC ... so double yay.

LordoftheCritics4h ago

If only Playstation games provided the ease of pc gaming features.

Primary being very few PS games support m/kb.

Fishy Fingers19h ago(Edited 19h ago)

I wish them the best of luck.

But PC players are often a patient bunch, many will even wait for Epic launcher exclusivity to end until a game comes to Steam.

If they didnt buy the console when its games were exclusive, why would they do it now theyre not?

MrNinosan5h ago

Way more do than you probably think.

ravens525h ago

All you need is that one game that'll make a few switch at a time. Like a game a PC player REALLY wants.

outsider16242h ago

I mean if there's 10 million pc gamers out there...getting atleast just 1 million from there is probably a good thing..right?

-Foxtrot19h ago

PC gamers are just too patient and loyal to their gaming set ups, something they've spent a lot of money on to perfect. They have backlogs of games which many never get round to finishing or get round to at all and will always have other multiplatform releases to keep them going.

Over the many years Sony has published so many awesome titles such as The Last of Us, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Infamous, Killzone, LittleBigPlanet, Dreams, Puppeteer, Resistance, Heavy Rain, Gran Turismo, Motor Storm, God of War, Horizon, Ratchet and Clank, Spiderman, Ghost of Tsushima, Bloodborne

If none of those games BEFORE all these PC ports convinced a hardcore PC gamer to get a PS5 console then why on Earth would porting them them to PC now make any difference? All PC gamers now know 100% is that they just have to be patient, which they are good at anyway to get a PS5 game 2 years later.

I get GaaS games or multiplayer focused titles but if people really want to play these games they'd have gotten a PS console years ago.

Crows902h ago

Not sure they're aiming to convince the hardcore PC gamer.

Not sure why people are obsessing over his comment...it seems pretty simple to me.

He will do all he can to entice gamers to move to his ecosystem. As you say....exclusives existing hasn't moved many gamers over. But if they get to try them and love the games then they might change their mind about waiting 2 years.

We're in an echo chamber on this site...I've Personally seen people with Xbox and PC setups but no PlayStation. I've also seen people with small PC setups but no console. Not every pc gamer invests thousands and many may decide to put one in the living room.

They're not looking to convince all of players to buy a PlayStation...just a few...and really it is just a PR statement after all...they have to give a reason why single player won't release day 1....not to mention they also have to ensure current PlayStation gamers don't jump ship to PC. It goes both ways and they're ignoring the big L by putting any of their games off their platform.

anast1h ago

"Not sure they're aiming to convince the hardcore PC gamer."

Right here

Kakashi Hatake2h ago

PC gamers think tomorrow is promised. Sorry, don't have time for that.

Michiel198956m ago

it's not just about loyalty or sunk cost, pc is an open platform while consoles are closed platforms. If you for example want to mod, you will play on pc, no question about it. Also if you like indie games, steam is a fucking goldmine for that. I've been playing a lot of indie games over the last years and there just seems to be an endless amount of them on steam. Also not having games locked to a certain fps is a prettty big deal for me and I assume a lot of other pc players.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 56m ago
helicoptergirl19h ago

Who cares? Then just stay on PC and play the waiting game. No big deal. Sony wins in the end anyway.

Number1TailzFan19h ago

I mean if there's any single player Sony games that I actually want that aren't on PC then I would buy said console to play them on. But the ones that I like that aren't on PC are few and far between anyway so no loss for me.

If I game, it's usually multiplayer titles, otherwise I like playing around with some other software.

Show all comments (31)
60°

Greetings from the newly minted CEO - Shams Jorjani

Operating under the username BigKahuna_AGS, Jorjani created a lengthy thread on the Helldivers subreddit to introduce himself to the community following his appointment as CEO in early May.