I was SO wrong about Starfield - AMAZING Game

Daniel played Starfield for nearly 40 hours after an initial 20 to 30 hours, concluding the game is better than widespread criticism indicates despite technical glitches and an overhyped launch.

The experience felt initially janky and lacking in fun, but improved substantially when focusing on personal goals and side activities such as weapon engineering, shipbuilding, and real estate rather than rushing the main campaign.

Engaging elements include quest dialogue flexibility reminiscent of 1990s adventure games, exploration of inhabited systems, and boarding and stealing enemy ships, balanced against shortcomings like frequent loading screens, basic AI, shallow combat, and barren planets.

Although marketing and hype from Todd Howard and Bethesda inflated public expectations, Daniel increased the game's personal score from 6.2 to 7.2 out of 10 while expecting future official patches and community mods.

Starfield gameplay mechanics, including side objectives, shipbuilding, real estate, and boarding enemy ships.

Critiques of Starfield, including loading screens, absence of seamless space-to-planet flight, simple AI, combat limitations, and barren environments.

Comparison of quest interaction to 1990s point-and-click adventure games.

Marketing hype, launch reception, early access duration, and personal score evaluation.

Daniel played Starfield for 20 to 30 hours, eventually reaching nearly 40 hours.

Early access for Starfield lasted six days prior to general release day.

Daniel raised the personal rating of Starfield from 6.2 out of 10 to 7.2 out of 10.