Hey! So hopefully you understand that this is not trying to rag on Starfield/Bethesda as a whole, just pointing out my own subjective issues with the intros specifically. Also, towards the end I say that it would be cool to have more games like Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate-again, I hope it's clear that I don't mean I want every game to be the size of those two games, that would be untenable. I'm just pointing out my admiration for how quickly those games get you into the world in ER's case, and how quickly you're making real meaningful choices in BG3. It's the efficiency of the games I'm drawing attention to rather than their gargantuan scale. Anyway, hope you get something out of the video even if you feel differently! Thanks for watching.

This is probably a lack of trust, on Bethesda's part, in their players and more recently, listening to the voices of reviewers and critics over their play testers. Using New Vegas as an example, many initial reviews complained about getting immediately killed after blowing off Goodsprings and heading north, taking the shortest imagined route to The Strip. This is despite the game mechanics telling you, and directly telling you, that taking on cazadors and deathclaws is suicide. Obsidian trusted that regular players would hang around the starting town and do quests to get the lay of the land, and repeat players and impatient ones could blow the town off and head where they will (usually east)

Always liked Morrowind's intro. A few rooms, some questions, and you're booted out into the world with nothing but a handful of notes telling you what to do next, IF you decide to read them.

The reason Oblivion makes you spend half an hour in a cramped dungeon at the start is pretty straightforward. The kind of vista you get when you step out of the sewer --- a grand panorama, unobscured by fog, where you can go anywhere -- was a huge novelty at the time, so they really want to sell the moment through contrast with the previous claustrophobic environment. Their later games don't have a good excuse, they seem to just do it because it's a tradition at this point.

My only problem with Bethesda intros are that they are pretty cool and charming the first time, and maybe the second time, too, but after the third time they become extremely unbearable as there isn't any way to just skip them without mods. Their quality in itself isn't the problem, it just becomes such a boring chore to go through the same slow paced "atmosphere building" process with every new save that it usually is enough to kill my urges to replay some of their titles.

EXCELLENT video as always

starting with a boring job at the mines would be absolutely an amazing intro if it was just the mines, it would be a great contrast of going from a boring job in a claustrophobic environment to the overwhelming freedom of the stars

Morrowind really was the best - you could create a character, learn the basics, get the gist of what's going on, and be out of the census office in like a minute

It's one of those very telling things that one of the more popular Skyrim mods, is the one that lets players skip the intro. Although this isn't a problem entirely unique to Bethesda either, as the Pokémon franchise has also received similar critique for its overly long and overly tutorialized intros. And it's not like the only alternative is Elden Ring kicking you out the door with little to no guidance. Contrast instead Breath of The Wild, where the game tutorializes the open world with the Great Plateau, a smaller open world environment that acts as a vertical slice of what the rest of the game has to offer.

Honestly I was gobsmacked at how poor that Starfield intro was, and I've enjoyed previous Bethesda intros quite lovingly. The slow paced mining was curious, interesting, a throwback to something like Half-Life, when suddenly in 15 mins I've been given my own ship by a character I've never met and I'm on the way to kill pirates - for some reason. Having been so distracted by all the valued clutter around me, I found myself not able to fast travel back to my ship and I called it for the night.

Now I wonder what you think about Red Redemption 2's several hours into before we finally get into the open world, or something like Horizonn Zero Dawn which at least does it pretty well and short. I guess it seems like open world games always have a linear prologue that is an hour long, or you get a tutorial island/area like Far Cry 5 or Witcher 3.

What makes BoTWs opening so special, is its a microcosm of the freedom the game gives you, with the exception of no town. All they need to to is copy it, but with a merchant camp to sell stuff, and the yare golden

I definitely agree with this take. I feel like Bethesda thinks they're creating this feeling of anticipation by forcing you to begin the game in such stagnance, but like you're describing it makes the intro sequences almost feel like a waiting room or a line at a theme park. I hate to be that guy but dark souls 1 is a great point of comparison because it has a near perfect intro. It actually prepares you for the journey you're about to embark on instead of just creating atmosphere and exposition dumping. It teaches you to expect the unexpected always, to be observant and look for ways to exploit a boss rather than wack at it with a broken sword, and it introduces you to the stakes. Ds1's intro is literally a distilled micro version of the dark souls experience which is everything an intro should be.

I remember being a teenager and not minding the fallout 3 intro. Starting out in this weird little vault shooting rad roaches with a bb gun felt familiar but just weird enough to be interesting, I shot my dad and was blown away that it didn't give me an immediate game over. The thing is though, I basically went into this game blind, didn't know it was a role-playing game with an open world, it was just something my folks got me for christmas cuz I'd recently played though my dad's copy of half-life 2. But I don't know if that experience really exists anymore what with the internet full of game promo material and people talking about games on social media, plus rpgs are basically a mainstream genre now. Bethesda should probably update they way they do intros but they seem to have embraced this as part of their brand so it's likely not going away any time soon.

Bethesda will forever be haunted by the success of Fallout New Vegas and The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind.

I like the Fallout 3 opening. I thought it helped immerse me into the world of the game. Maybe the problem is that it works *once* across all of these games, and after that it feels like a chore, whether it's replaying Fallout 3 or starting Starfield.

I think Fallout 3 starting in the vault was a great decision, probably the best opening sequence of any game I have played. The emotional impact of going from living in that cramped little vault to being thrust into this huge sprawling wasteland made me feel what my character was probably feeling at the time- fear, awe and exhileration all mixed together- a sense that my (in-game) life had been completely turned upside down. All that inpact would have been hugely diminished if they had just unceremoniously punted you out into the open world with none of that contrast to play off of. I don't know, sometimes I just like a game to buy me dinner first.

It almost seems like Bethesda has the whole thing backwards. Rather than letting players loose to explore the world and mechanics enough to become invested in the *why* of the game, they pump the breaks with a lengthy "here's what's up" segment that dripfeeds meaningful ways to interact with said world. Or basically: the whole time you're getting introduced to the world, all you can think is "man, I can't wait to play the game." It really highlights how opposite New Vegas' approach is. Some dude just tried murdering you for reasons you don't understand, and now you wake up in a small town threatened by escaped convicts... and it's entirely up to you to figure out what to do. I even think NV has the edge in terms of lore and storytelling, it just lets the player look for answers instead of tying them to a chair and dumping it on them.

All they need is an option that says "Do you want to go off the rails now or tutorial first?"

SO many mods out there are designed to let you make your character choices and skip the first dungeon. That is definitely communicating something to Bethesda if they ever choose to listen to their audience.

You wanna know the best part? Seyda Neen and Goodsprings fixed these problems two decades and one decade ago.

Can't say I disagree. As a Morrowind fanboy I've always felt that had the right approach. You start the game and within minutes you're free. Sure there is tutorial quests in Seyda Neen and Balmora if you need them but you can also just head off and do whatever you want. It's a much derided view these days but I really think that game is still the best example of the experience people are looking for from Bethesda. Total creativity and total freedom.

Counterargument: Outer Wilds. The first hour or so of the game, you don't have access to the spaceship... But you are being tough the skills and basic knowledge you'll need on your journey. And they let you get immersed in the culture of the town, making you care about its inhabitants. Counter-counter argument: Breath of the Wild. You are out of the Shrine of resurrection in no more than two minutes and you can appreciate the scope of the world... Even if you'll need a few hours completing a similarly hidden tutorial before you can leave the Great Plateau.

In principle I actually quite like 'a microcosm of the wider game' as the intro, rather than 'meaningful decisions that impact the game in 20 hours time' - But while I would be willing to make the argument that Fable and Fable 2's introductions are doing that, I'm don't think Bethesda's intros are doing that either.

Unconfident about game design, so they try to double down on the window dressing, force-feeding you "life-life graphics", the expensive voice actors, etc, etc. The more expensive AAA gaming becomes, the less they become games.

When I was 12, i 've played Oblivion 4 the first time without knowing it was an open world game, and the first part did not helped to known about this new way of play. But , for me, breaking free of a confined and narrowed space, and jump in to a big world that was telling me to feel free and do things and explore as i ser fit, was a really meaningfull experience to me, and still is until this day. Thank you for help me reflect on that, enjoy playing ^^

I think this speaks to Bethesda's typically poor writing in general. That they couldn't come up with a better, more compelling way to introduce the player into the world than what they usually do is because they can't really think of any other way. Even No Man's Sky's intro, which is the most painful section of the game as you barely have anything to start with, at least gets you working on rebuilding the starter ship almost right off the bat so you can get off the first planet. Other good open world or sandbox games like Mount & Blade, Kenshi or heck even Minecraft just drop you into the world with minimal explanation. You're supposed to glean stuff about the world as you go. And yeah you already mentioned Elden Ring and New Vegas. Those intros were short and sweet. They do what they need to do then set you off on your own to figure things out. And that's what makes those games so memorable, since that sense of adventure and exploration feel more personal, rather than something that you were kinda forced to do because it's part of the main quests. Additionally I think they try too hard to make those intros really cool-looking "at first." Especially cool-looking for games journalists. They keep looking for that artificial "wow" moment. That vault open moment. So that cart ride in Skyrim was set up that way so that you feel that sense of, "wow we didn't even have movable carts in Oblivion, or most other cRPGs!" all the way to "wow is that an actual dragon flying around!?" They seem to not know how real people, especially those with hundreds or thousands of hours in it, actually play these games, which is often starting a new playthrough with a different character and maybe different goals. And therefore we'll have to redo that intro again, and again, and again. Thank goodness for alternate start mods.

"Good, you're finally awake." "Not for long."

The funny thing is, for all this is a long documented issue with Bethesda's opening, they actually used to have this figured out. If you look at Morrowind, this issue isn't there. You just talk to three NPCs (and in the process make your character) get a brief tutorial on combat (which you can skip), a very brief tutorial on magic items/spells and then you're out playing in the world. It's like a slightly quicker version of the New Vegas intro.

Skyrim, the only game where I've saved moments BEFORE being introduced to the character creator screen. It meant I never had to go on the cart ride again. I think Skyrim's tutorial dungeon actually does a lot. You get to make meaningful decisions on HOW you can engage with the game, be it questing, combat style, mechanic interaction, etc. Rails don't feel like rails if you're having fun and getting to play how you want.

You know, I wouldn't be surprised if the extremely slow start and the fact that it takes, for some at least, 10-15 hours before the game really gets good is the main reason for the mixed reception Starfield seems to be getting.

it's funny that the one thing 76 did better than the other bethesda games, is giving you a quick intro and just setting you free really quickly. There is a questline (now) you get nudged towards, but you can just do whatever. Appalachia is actually really fun to explore, if basically nothing else.

Have to agree on this, since I've been having hard time getting through intros in games over the last 10 years. The excitement to play the game burns away getting through the intro in the first session. I really just want to get going or I get restless. Also doing mundane chores in games while I have actual mundane chores to do, makes me feel bad so I put the game down. I hope I can have a good time with a game like this someday though, but not right now.

I feel like the problem comes from needing to make a tutorial sequence. They need to find a way to introduce all the systems without being too handholdy. Not an easy task, but a very necessary one.

Fallout 3 intro was incredibly immersive for its time .

I'm feeling this way about Breath of the Wild vs. Tears of the Kingdom currently. With the tedious controls and my joycon drift just getting worse, the floating islands feel much, much more railroaded and limited compared to the Plateau.

I didn't mind Fallout 3's intro, but i do agree that is is very lengthy and there should be an option to skip to be 19 or going outside the vault. 4's intro was too short so you basically had little to no time to bond with spouse and shaun so some of us can't really care due to having so minimal time Yeah i think New Vegas is that perfect medium, players can decide how long they want the intro to be by staying in goodsprings, or just up and leaving.

I really like the intros, the first time I go through it

In Baldur's Gate 3, I've created my character, then the next 30min after that I met intriguing characters on a big-ass squid-ship in the middle of a demon-war with dragons flying around. Oh, also there's a worm squirming in my brain apparently. The best intro 3h30min I've had in a long time !

Good video, but I'm going to push back against this. I think you are underestimating what these intros are trying to do and, more importantly, who they are for. They're there to establish the setting, the tone and kickstart the narrative, yes, but more than anything else, they are tutorials for someone new to this style of game, or games generally. Fallout: New Vegas and Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind, as the comments have brought up, aren't aimed at a wide audience. New Vegas can get away with a concentrated intro because anyone buying a stand-alone expansion has likely already played the base game. Morrowind was from a time when these complex, open-world cRPGs were still pretty niche. It was built for PC and targeting fans of those kinds of games that aren't overwhelmed by that degree of freedom that intro offered. Oblivion was the first Bethesda game designed from the ground up for a console release with a blockbuster marketing budget. They expected to get first time players who didn't really understand what the game was trying to do. I'm talking the people that need the "L-stick to move" tutorials. Hence, 45 minutes of killing rats in a cage before you are let off the leash. I see people calling this a lack of confidence, or not trusting the player, but you need to understand that a lot of time/money is put into playtesting every part of these games. Bethesda and Microsoft put this game in front of dozens, if not hundreds, of "never played a game before" people and found the friction points that caused them to put the game down forever. These intros are to smooth over those friction points, getting them to play long enough to get hooked. So when the player is finally let go, they can enjoy their next 40-60-120 hours with the game. Yes, this is annoying for established players. This drags down a second playthrough. But you are complaining about 45 minutes, approximately 1% of your total playtime. The most important 1%, yes. But for the new players, who saw the multi-million dollar ad campaign and just paid $70, Bethesda wants to make sure that 45 minutes isn't 100% of their total playtime. They want them to understand how to play so they can get to the big reveal moment, play for 20+ hours, buy the DLC and recommend it to their friends. Nintendo has a similar approach with Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom. You could counter that BotW especially give you freedom as soon as you exit the cave, but it's an illusion. You may be off the leash, you're still in a tiny playpen. The Great Plateau and the Great Sky Island are doing the exact same thing that Bethesda is. Nintendo is just better at it. And veteran gamers still complain about being stuck in those tutorial areas. Maybe a "Quickstart" option help, like the inevitable "skip intro" mods. But I'd bet they are afraid inexperienced players would click the option, get frustrated and never touch it again. And remember, they playtest the hell out of big budget titles. That kind of thing definitely happens.

Call me weird but I like the intros in Bethesda games. The being a child and growing up in Fallout 3 thing was pretty amazing to me back in 2008. I know it's cool and all these days to complain about anything and everything but back in the 2000s when I started playing games I accepted games as they were. I didn't cry about the nightmare levels in Max Payne. To me it was a part of the game. I didn't enjoy them back then but I didn't focus on being miserable about it. Or when Lords of Shadows 2 came out in 2014 everyone was crying about the 30 second rat sequences but I didn't mind them.

They need to listen to fans. "Alternative Start" is like the #1 downloaded mod for all their games. How hard is it to make the intro a cutscene movie then just plop the player into a situation where they can build their character and start the game how they want to? Or at least provide a small preset number of starts based on something like a starting class or which perks you pick when creating your char?

It's funny. All of those games with the limited intro sequences (skyrim, fallout3, oblivion) were ones that I played for massive hours vs other games that let you loose right out of the gate. I could never really get into Fallout New Vegas or even Elden Ring. Maybe it isn't immediately apparent but having that kind of limitation and constriction could help a player stick with the game for the long term. I definitely said to myself 'man this suucks' during the Starfield intro but after a few hours i'd forgotten about it. What I kind of knew was coming in the rest of the game (massive open world and free choices) drew me to stick with it. WoW retail used to have this kind of constricting first levels, and that I think served the addiction. 'Just get this and this done then eventually you can do this'. Meanwhile you've spent a whole day doing the menial early tasks in the game because you know what's coming later. Thanks for the vid, thought provoking.

I think the idea why Bethesda's doing this is because of contrast. Start with a small and limiting space where they create a feeling in the player they just want to get out there to explore the vast world - it's there to make this feeling grow so that it's bursting at the seems when the intro is over. In Starfield I think they failed for the most part to instill this feeling, but it has worked in the past; when I think back on playing Skyrim and Fallout 3/4 the intros really made the entrance into the larger world so much greater than if they hade just dropped me into it from the get-go.

It’s all about contrast, awe and learning. They need a linear space to teach you the basic functions before slapping you with the awe of freedom.

i absolutely agree with this Analysis; i would however humbly like to add on that, to my mind, the best Intro in a Bethesda Game (even better than New Vegas, and i do not say that Lightly) is to be found in Morrowind. regardless of the quality of the rest of the Game, the Intro is incredibly well paced and perfectly written for a Freeform RPG. you wake from a Prophetic Dream, go thru a quick Character Creation Session, and BANG you're in the World without a Leash. want to stay in the Starting Village of Seyda Neen to do some quests? you may! want to catch the Silt Strider Bus straight to the Main Quest in Balmora? go right ahead! want to wander North or East? the road paths ever onward. it's honestly incredible to me how it's the only Elder Scrolls Game like this - every other one has you start in some monotonous Dungeon. you'd think after Morrowind's surprise critical Acclaim and (relatively) mainstream Success for the Time, that Bethesda would have learned this Lesson, but they seem more and more interested in making Theme Parks than compelling Worlds. a shame

I always felt that these intros werent meant to get you immersed in the world before getting out in the world but we could argue it doesnt need to take so long

The weird thing about these tutorials is that they seem to be trying to teach you so much but for most players teach nothing at all. Like, I know pick up/interact is going to be one of two buttons, I know I’m going to press in a stick to run, I know I’m going to use the triggers to aim and shoot, and most experienced gamers will also know those things. All the stuff I actually needed help learning in Starfield I had to go into the help menu for. For a game with so many systems, Starfield really goes out of its way to show off the most common of its mechanics.

Bethesda: Why is nobody using our menus? Fans: They are garbage and modding is possible. Bethesda: What do you want then? Fans: Intuitive Menus. Bethesda: MORE WORSE MENUS IN STARFIELD.

I might agree with you on repeated playthroughs, but the intro in Skyrim and to a lesser extend F4 are great to set the stage for what kind of world you're stepping into. The sense of claustrophobia is a contrast to the feeling of freedom when you do leave the cave or vault.

The super long intro's in videogames now is simply to eat up as much time into the steam 2hour refund limit as possible. Nothing more, nothing less. The first 2 hours of Forspoken are spent in New York.

tried it last night. i made it like an hour in. i play games slowly, so what takes one person 5 minutes i may take 15 just lingering and exploring and poking around. but regardless, this intro was so damn boring. not to mention how immersion-breaking it was that Lin didn't react to me shooting her with the laser cutter. like not even a "hey!" or a "good thing these suits have special laser cutter protection or that would have hurt" or something. nope. she just stood there staring at me. in 2023. when i shot her with a laser. but i digress. in discussing it with my housemates, i came up with the idea that what the intro should have been was: roughly 30 seconds to a minute of cutscene setting up the fact that the Player is in some sort of menial job (maybe curated by a dozen or starting locations/jobs based on background). show the passing of time that the Player does the same thing over and over every day. then the cutscene ends and the Player wakes up and is immediately playable. the Player can immediately step out into the world if they want, or they can stick around and just work in the area they spawned. maybe there's two VERY SMALL story hooks like "we need [job] to be done well for the next few days because the boss is coming" or "we need to take a quick trip into town to grab [item]". let the Player exist in this space for a few in-game days. let them just be in the world like any other game. but with no main quest line. no real hook. no story. just vibes. then, only after like a week in game/first level up/certain location triggers/etc does the main quest line begin and we get that annoying ass slow walk and talk/infodump. let the Player taste the freedom of the game and then introduce the rails at a later time. don't just immediately put them on rails from minute one. i really hope the conversation about how bad Starfield's intro was helps shake Bethesda up to doing something differently for ES6 and the future. there's a reason that one of the most popular mods for each Bethesda game are the "skip intro" mods. anyway. now that i've written an essay, i'll watch the video lmao.

It starts slow and small and then expands and expands and expands and expands and I kinda dig it, but the first hour def is not the best

New Vegas *Obsidian Cough* doesn't have the railroad problem if you don't count the way they leveled the roads to New Vegas

This has always been a frustrating characteristic of bethesda games. There's been too many times where I wanted to pick the game back up and start over again after not playing it for a while but I don't because the first hour or so feels too much like a chore. I'd rather just do a chore in real life.

I'd argue that Starfield's intro is a way to fast "from zero to hero" beginning: it costs almost less than 30 minutes from digging and touching a strange artifact, becoming the special guy, getting your space ship for free, busting out a few pirate ships and their boss till finally you are greeted with "Welcome to Constellation". In other words: the game forces you to feel special or great - but I as the player don't buy it.

Starfield is baffling to me. It feels like they wanted to do something new and just... couldn't? The weight of old games pulls the team down to do the same thing. Why is there so much junk? Notepads and pens and knickknacks that don't matter, while my follower yells at me all the dang time. They have the team, Bethesda should try doing something new. And not in Gamebryo. It will never have good lighting.

Starfields opening sequence is legitimately one of the worst I've seen. It is truly awful. Even though Skyrim and Fallout 4 had similar issues, as described in this video, at least in Skyrim we learn that there is a civil war, a rebel leader who has been captured and is ready to be executed, and the execution is interrupted by a giant dragon attacking. It's linear but there is some spectacle. In Fallout 4 we see nukes dropping and watch our spouse be murdered and our son taken away. While it's linear and slow, it has a fun plot hook and is visually interesting. I actually quite like Fallout 3's, because it establishes a narrative of having grown up in a claustrophobic, confined environment and then having a big "wow" moment when the vault is opened and you step into the world for the first time, that perfectly frames the exploration and freedom to come. though I understand the argument that prioritizing narrative delivery over selling the core appeal of the gameplay might not be the best choice. I do believe it's a big part of why that vault opening sequence is so iconic, though. Starfields presents us with no intriguing details about the conflicts of the setting, no narrative hook, no visual spectacle, and is just...boring. The planet is all brown, one of the ugliest in the galaxy, the vision the artefact gives you is some pretty colours which doesn't seem to have any deeper meaning (Mass Effect 1 did this exact intro much better 16 years ago). Even the character create screen is clinical white with no interesting visuals or music. The enemies are just generic pirates in space suits. It's honestly one of the most boring introductions to a game I've ever seen.

'We have a thousand planets!' Cool, so like, let us start on any of them. Fuck radiant quests, I want radiant intros. Randomly assign me a cot, a hut, & a backstory, give my family or SO a few lines, show off a cute pet, then blow it all to hell. Cinematic intros that are good are entertaining exactly one time, and if they spent millions on this shit they flushed it all.

I don't typically care much about story in games, but Fallout 4's intro had me hooked. Set the stage and didn't feel overly long to me.

It really feels like Bethesda just IGNORES the entire game industry and what their competition is doing when it comes to small design choices. And like, I'm enjoying the game a lot, but it feels like my dream game from the early 2010's.

Bethesda RPG's could stand to learn from the intro of Kingdom Come Deliverance. You can very easily have a long intro, just make it a microcosm of the full game.

regarding Fallout 3, surely any introduction that features Liam Neeson saying "come to daddy" can't be all bad, right?

I disagree. Long intros let me get used to my character, I am learning more about the world, the history, and I have a chance to get into my character. Starfield has the worst Bethesda intro, on this we can agree but for completely different reasons. People, and you, are saying the intro was so slow and here I am, finding the intro too fast and throwing action upon me too soon. It was so fast and so abrupt I couldn't get over why the hell that guy just gave me his ship. So guys in red suits attacked and even before I discovered how to crouch or change weapons the combat ended on its own. I was just standing there, watching this insanity. Then the guy just handed me his fucking spaceship! Doesn't make any sense! Why can't we go together and he can fill me in along the road because I am clueless! Who am I? Where am I? What is happening? No, we don't have time for any kind of explanation. We need action! I just reached the first city, talked to that woman, gave the artefact and had ZERO reason and motivation to do anything with the main story because the game never cared to tell me what is this about. Why would I ever want to do the main quest? There is no hook because there is no really meaningful intro. I already have a ship, I can just turn around and fly away. So why wouldn't I? I lost all interest. Hell, I didn't build any interest in the first place, I never got the time to do that, everything happened too fast. I wish we spent an hour with long conversations and those boring(!) walk and talk sequences before jumping into action or at least a codex to read and understand the worldbuilding. This is supposed to be an RPG but I can't roleplay in a world I know nothing about with a character I know nothing about.

In order of Goodness: - Skyrim’s intro 👌 - Fallout 4’s intro 👍 - Starfield… 😒

I'm curious; what's your take on games like The Witcher 3 and Horizon Zero Dawn where you're plunked into a small, starter world, free to do as you please, and then let loose after a couple of hours?

Maybe Bethesda should try open world Zelda's approach (start in a small chunk of the open world, before gaining access to everything else). Interesting video!

It sounds like Bethesda are slowly dropping you into the world. Here's movement, here's combat, here's space exploration. It's not a 90 minute movie, you could sink hundreds of hours into it. An hour (in a game you've already paid for!) is a drop in the pond. I like how u acknowledged this point and offered examples of how to improve. Great vid!

This is the result of playtesting thinking information overload will make people not like the game. Strange doctrines around making every game handhold children and first time gamers instead of just letting you play.

Every time I tune into a Starfield stream they are in a dialog box. I was thinking that was all this game has to offer lol.

There's devs that learn from critique and mistakes and theres devs that don't. And I feel like that's more of a metric on how I judge dev teams with a robust history than on their individual games.

You didn't bring up the fact that the cave the artifact is in might as well have a yellow brick road that leads you directly to the cave it's in, with a giant glowing Las Vegas style arrow sign pointing into the cave that says "Super important story artifact here", but somehow you're the first person to find it. What a joke!

It speaks to how deeply insular Bethesda's dev teams are, that after literal decades of people instantly modding out their prolonged and weak intros to vast popularity, they still flatly refuse to understand that people don't find them remotely engaging. Even if you simply MUST have your weirdo 'immersive' tutorial, make it OPTIONAL!

agree to disagree... I've always liked the way the Fallout games started. The claustrophobic monotony in Fallout 3 before escaping the vault, and the calm before the storm followed by the panic getting to the vault in Fallout 4. Helps the player very briefly get in the shoes of the protagonist whilst learning some of the games systems (which can be overwhelming).

These sorts of intros are completely focused on a first time player, and that player doing one playthrough. Bethesda's intros in particular revolve around the assumption you'll never play the game again, instead doing everything on one save file. If you only play the game once, or maybe once every few years, then these intros can be very enjoyable. I myself enjoy the fallout 3 intro - but after seeing it more than once it gets very tiring! Sad to see they've gone for the extended route again, these sorts of games are perfect for giving us the option of following the intro or not. (I can't remember which ones specifically off the top of my head, but I recall playing games that basically say "do you need to be shown what to do?" and the player can say no - resulting in letting you either skip the tutorial or blaze through it much quicker.)

I mostly agree in the case of oblivion, but regarding skyrim and FO3, I really like those slow beginnings. Not knowing why I'm gonna be killed and being saved due to a dragon ex machina in skyrim was AWESOME the first time. Fallout 3 was my first fallout and I remember being amazed that the game started with my BIRTH. Those first 40 minutes in the vault managed to convey a naiveté to its inhabitants, that's in SUCH contrast to the real world, due to them being born there (even the bullies are toothless), that getting out and seeing true gangs of vampires, fascists and raiders gave me quite a shock. There's a lot to be said regarding the effect of those beginnings on replays, though. There should be an option to skip those, even if context would be lost, focusing on people that have already played through it. As for new vegas, as much as I love the game, it doesn't need to convey that much "falloutness" as 3 does. No talk of vaults, experiments, water shortage, enclaves, nuclear war backstory... You're a dude that's been left for dead and now you want revenge. By the way, this is a post apocalyptic world. That needs way less context, which lends itself to a quicker start.

It's funny how BGS's last game Fallout 76 had on of the shortest intros.

See, I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I think fallout 3 has the perfect intro of all Bethesda games. They are tutorials for most of the systems, set up your character building reasonably well, show you dialog and speech checks, and when escaping it becomes your first dungeon. Plus you have some interesting choices that have some impact in it. But I understand the issue that the video is pointing out

Morrowind's intro, like New Vegas, got it right. Make your character, spend 5 minutes on basic tutorialising, and you're done.

Spot on on Bethesda intros having unskippable padding in their intros. But the secondary complaint about Bethesda intros is that they force you into the main quest, and it becomes very hard to ignore when you are trying to explore and get lost in the world. Oblivion's main quest is to prevent the literal invasion of hell, FO4's main quest is to rescue your kidnapped son, etc. And yet, we as players ignore that and go explore instead, which doesnt make sense in character. At least Morrowind set you on the path for the main quest, but no real world-ending stakes were set at the intro.

I think Hbomberguy said it best with his New Vegas video where he shows that the intro to fallout 2/3/4 all have mods to skip the intro and theyre some of the most popular mods. Like how do you not see the problem.

They constraint to contrast with the freedom of the rest of the game. Plus providing a focused narrative and tutorial introduction.

Bethesda just has to do one thing to make me happy. NEW GAME- SKIP INTRO. I don't mind the slow-roll intro the first time. Just for the love of GOD let me skip it in the future!

I don't get this. Starfield's intro is miles better and faster than Skyrim, Oblivion and F4 (I don't really remember much of F3 and NV, I admit). It's honestly a breath of fresh air in comparison to past Bethesda intros, and the moment you get the ship you can absolutely go off on your own. If the take is just 'Bethesda intros are typically bad' then I guess I agree, but if WiG is trying to say that Starfield's intro is just as bad as Skyrim or F4, then I can't help but disagree immensely.

The Starfield intro wouldn't be so bad if the majority of the game wasn't like the intro

You answered your own question. It’s supposed to be a contrast.

Hence all the mods that replace and expand the intros of Bethesda games. Live Another Life (and other similar mods) is the backbone of Skyrim replay-ability.

To everyone who bought this game full price and review it so I won’t have to thank you I will save my money

The intro really hurts the game, its really boring and bland compared to their other titles. Yes, you are supposed to be in a small place so you can be overwhelmed by the open world when you finally emerge but they could have done this better by being on a small ship that crash lands on a planet and you have to survive and find a new ship, instead you start off shooting rocks!

Starfield has a "first 8 hours" problem. It finally started clicking and I do think it's a pretty awesome game after the hump but man, for the first several hours I just had to keep reminding myself it's Bethesda, they know what they're doing (in their own way).

I'm alot more paitent than others when it comes to slow intros in games, as I can accept upfront that the what I'm watching is set up, stakes, themes and character establishing to get me and others on to the level that the story is about. Part of what makes or breaks a game for me is how the protagonist is handled. I'm just very tired of the silent self insert projection avatars in general. I like Fallout 4 the most out of Bethesda's line up as we play as a CHARACTER and not an avatar who has no investment or ties in the world that we play in. Nate/Nora has a goal and story that players can decide how it ends, a bittersweet reunion and goodbye or a greek tradedy in a trolly car situation with the destruction of all but one of the major factions. You can argue that their could have been more added to Nate/Nora's story and I would agree, I would love a more stronger Character driven narrative for Fallout 4 as what we have is pretty good, but as a creative I can see where the improvements can be made, a found family dynamic with the companions and settlers of Sanctuary, discussions of what to do on the major descisions on what to do, more chances to let Nate/Nora to voice thier opinion and views on things. I would argue that it's the characters that makes the settings interesting. Character driven stories are stronger as there is an intentional arc and themes that the characters go through and explore. The bare minimum in that instance is to remember that the characters have more going on about them than the imediate plot, they can banter about other things, talk about thier points about the news etc. At the centre of this is the main protagonist / main cast of characters. In a cast, if one character is flat then it's a minor if neutral flaw, if it's a silent protagonist however the game really has to pick up the slack to make me want to engage in the game and story as the characters and narritive have to awkwardly navigate around the fact that one of the major actors is silent and has no input, no banter or chemisty with the rest of the cast, nothing other than hitting things with a big stick all because we have prioritised a misunderstood view of player immersion over good story and character writing and continue to drag the relic of silent avatars with us.

The problem i find with this games intro vs other bethesda titles is that this one doesnt actually get you hooked into a story or the world. Its an extremely boring and bland intro.

I started the video thinking "Those intros are not that bad, he must be exagerating a bit" but I was swayed by the end. The thing is I don't think you can get the usual bethesda freedom in an intro, you need the intro on rails for context and the relieve of freedom that comes after. Could the intros be better? absolutely and they should be. But I don't think fixing them is as easy as pointing it out

2:39 How dare you make an exact replica of me and put it in the game.

There are bugs in Morrowind that are the same in Starfield.

The opening was weak in Starfield for me but at 30 hours in I'm so fully hooked I don't care anymore. Agree though, Starfield opening was not great.

I don't necessarily agree that a linear start without freedom is the main issue, or even a problem at all. Take, for instance, BOTW or TOTK. In both games, players have limited freedom initially - no runes, no paragliders, etc. Yet, Zelda's beginning is widely regarded as one of the best gaming experiences. Therefore, I believe your analysis might be overly critical in emphasizing the lack of freedom. In my opinion, the primary issue with Starfield's start isn't the absence of choices; it's simply that it's incredibly dull.

It is true the intros don't do the best job of setting the tone for what the game can be. And it's weird as much as I think new vegas ends up feeling like a bland wasteland that after 30 hours I have barely any interest in exploring( as it's the one game where I had to use fast travel to advance because of how boring the world was) the game does allow you more freedom from the start and even overall. Granted I you do have to figure that out on your own like I had no idea I could team up with the powderkegs to take over good springs until I looked it up lol for example.

Heck, I'll defend Fallout 3 AND it's intro often, but there's no getting around the fact that players felt the need to mod out it's intro just to get into the real game faster. As much as I enjoy the whole "Dr. Quest" vibe it had going, it could have been far more efficient.

SPOILERS: Well, once you start new game + you don't have to replay the intro... at least not until you make a new character. I think this was done intentionally to avoid the feeling of having to sit thru the entire opening sequence in these games because Bethesda knows its players play their games for years and years.