Todd Howard Says There Will Be 'Over 1,000 Planets' In Starfield

So they will be copying no man's sky randomising system, which is fine but there's some barren planets in no man's sky.

But is the random generation fixed for everyone or is everyone's game different with different planets, but then again how would quests and story work with randomised planets

I'm betting the majority of them will be small or randomized, with a more reasonable and sane number, ballparking 8-12 being full on biomes/big open areas to explore.

This was one of the big concerns. Procedurally generated planets.

Did anyone else think that the frame rate was pretty poor?

Bigger doesnt always mean better assassin's creed gets bigger with every new release but my favourite games in the series are still the Altair & ezio ones

@__jamiie Yes it was a little low. I noticed some of the shadows weren't the best either. But old engine

I was under the impression there were less than 10 more-carefully crafted planets. This news has me concerned.

Currently staring at a frozen Fallout 4 on my Series S. Part of Xbox but still haven't fixed it. Can't finish it due to all the crashing/freezing in certain areas. No mods just a few creation club things. I'll be mega p1553d if it happens on Starfield.

Starfield coming 2023. Playable state 2027. Join us for your story.......of frustration

Man there is a lot of negative posts in this thread. I'm honestly excited if the planets are procedurally generated no big deal. I agree there were some lifeless ones in NMS, but they had a purpose with the horrors and it's pretty realistic to have barren planets in space. I'm going to stay hopeful.

Most planets are barren lol

I was surprised how good it looked. Expected the graphics to be much worse

I'm worried it's quantity over quality

I was actually hoping for the game to just take place in a single more focused system myself. No Man's Sky is incredibly ambitious but the procedurally generated planets were very hit or miss overall. That's definitely concerning.

@UltimateOtaku91 in No Man's Sky all the universe is the same for everyone I believe. The whole thing is mostly built by procedural generation but once done it's the same for everyone. I'm not sure if that's how Starfield works but it might be.

‘1000 planets…10 of them with something interesting on’ …doesn’t have quite the same ring to it. But that’s probably the reality.

This whole no man’s sky 1000 planets thing was more a red flag for me than a celebration. I loved no man’s sky…but let’s be honest, the amount of copy and paste that goes on. Creatures with a slightly different colour to them. Empty worlds. Lack of story and direction… it’s not what I personally want from starfield. Mass effect and fallout meshed together is enough without adding no man’s sky in there.

The game visually looks great though…animations look a huge step up from fallout 4. I’m digging the 70’s sci-fi cinematic vibe.
The games performance though… I honestly don’t think this is hitting first part of next year. If it is then it’s hitting with that frame rate.

We need an entire planet of salt here.
Todd Howard is infamous for lying.

The game seemed too big and bland for it's own good from what I saw. Along with a choppy framerate.. 😔
I'm sounding really negative here, but I really was not impressed.

I totally understand the criticism here. Bigger doesn't always mean better. Devs are always trying to go bigger and not really thinking of the end experience. I think something like MAG is a great example of that. Massive MP game, but absolute chaos in practice. Is it really possible for us to explore an entire galaxy in a video game?. None of us really have the time for that.

However, this is a space exploration RPG, it needs to feel bigger than just 10 planets. I saw people commenting "NMS has X so Starfield better have X or this will be embarrassing", so you know that if Starfield didn't have 1000s of planets, they'd just be complaining that Starfield didn't have it, and felt small for a game in that genre.

So our choices are 'Small', 'Barren', or 'Too Big'. If we get 10 hand crafted colonies on 5-6 densely packed solar systems, with engaging stories across the inhabitants, and the rest is big and mostly empty (like how the actual universe is), I'll consider that a win.

Whilst im happy to jump in and try this, nothing ive seen so far convinces me its better than no mans sky, which does everything this does and a ton more besides.
Hopefully the poor frame rate and janky anims will be fixed. Tge game will pass or fail based on the narritive elements for me, I just hope its a good rpg.
I wish it well, but its not showing me its there yet!

To me the animations seemed a bit poor in the game demo of this too. But procedurally generated planets is not a good thing. Far better if they just made 5 to 10 actual fully detailed planets.

So this was his 'You see that mountain? You can climb it!' moment of this presentation.

@Would_you_kindly Assassins Creed is my favorite series as well, and i cant wait for all future games to get bigger and bigger and have more and more to do. I want to keep experiencing new things and not be going to the same places over and over again. That gets boring when the world is so small.

@UltimateOtaku91 i would imagine if there story missions in certain locations those planets won't be randomised and will be a set design. Depending on how the rest of the game is designed if it's a shared universe or unique to each person's save file I would imagine the non story based planets will be generated the first time you enter their orbit or something.

Honestly with their past few RPG releases being poor my expectations for this game are pretty low. Games like Elite: Dangerous have had entire galaxies worth of stars and planets to explore already so I'm not really blown away.

I'm expecting something where they've thrown a lot of money, and the blood, sweat, and tears of hundreds of talented people into an industrial "video game machine" that'll squeeze out some homogenous Space Action RPG™ by brute force.