As the countdown to Starfield’s September 6th launch grows shorter, the gaming universe seems to hum with a kind of cosmic electricity. Pegged as potentially the most anticipated game of the year, or even the decade, Starfield has drawn in audiences with the promise of a once-in-a-lifetime epic space-faring quest that features thousands of fully explorable planets and complex side quests as well as a robust modding kit that lets you create entirely new planets. But as we all prepare for lift-off, there’s a darker side to this enthusiasm: a rising tide of review bombing campaigns and criticism that threatens to tarnish the game’s reputation before it even hits the market. The question is, why?
It’s easy to write off trolls like a certain Twitter user who lambasted Starfield with claims that exploration in the game is inherently dishonest because you can’t land on gas giants.
“But you can build ships that look like robots and have powers?” was his quick and snappy retort when educated by a lot of people online with elementary understanding of science and science fiction. This argument might seem ridiculous to anyone who knows even an iota about the genre, but it reflects a disturbing trend in gaming culture: the inability to differentiate between genuine criticism and simply hating for the sake of hating.
Why not? It's a video game….with alien creatures and jetpack and spaceships shaped like robots…why is the line drawn on gas giant exploration
— kingthrash S-Class Prophet (@DoWhatYouDo6) August 29, 2023
Don’t get me wrong; science fiction has its liberties. From the transporters in Star Trek to lightsabers in Star Wars, the genre thrives on stretching the bounds of current scientific understanding. However, these flights of fancy are generally grounded by some adherence to scientific principles, even if loosely. You can bet your favorite warp drive that no one in Star Trek has ever touched down on a gas giant for a leisurely stroll – let alone headed straight for the sun.
In another corner of this bleak universe are the dedicated Xbox haters, seemingly motivated by nothing more than the innate human desire to pick sides for whatever reason.
If we go by their logic, PlayStation has already won – even Microsoft admits to this. Not to mention, both the eye-test and data proves the PlayStation 5 is king right now. It has far more exclusives, both in number and arguable quality. Yet, the upcoming Starfield exclusivity for Xbox has ruffled feathers as though it were a divine injustice. It’s a tale as old as time – or at least as old as the console wars – and it’s fueled by an irrational brand loyalty that serves no one.
A PlayStation fanboy may openly deride Starfield, not because of its developer Bethesda or any feature of the game but simply because it’s releasing on a platform that they don’t prefer or have. The hate is so nonspecific that if Starfield was a PS5 exclusive, they’d undoubtedly sing it praises.
Ironically, there was a chance that Starfield could’ve been exclusive to the PS5 too. At least, until Microsoft heard of this plan and decided to buy ZeniMax Media instead.
And let’s not forget the camp of critics who have decided that Bethesda equals “buggy.” These individuals continue to lambast games like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, despite its overwhelming success and longevity, under the banner of enlightening the rest of us poor, deluded souls.
While it’s true that no game is perfect, dismissing a studio’s entire portfolio with a broad stroke doesn’t help anyone. It is these types of critics that add nothing to the discourse; they’re just tapping into popular narratives for the dopamine rush that comes from having others agree with them, however fleetingly.
So, what’s the takeaway from all of this cacophony? It’s crucial to differentiate between authentic criticism and trolling, between rational dialogue and vindictive rhetoric. Starfield carries the weight of a $7.5 billion Microsoft investment and the hopes of countless gamers worldwide. It could very well be a Game of The Year contender. More than that, it’s Bethesda’s first new IP in decades – a curse and a blessing.
With its immersive universe and robust features, Starfield deserves to be judged on its actual merits and flaws instead of being used as another battleground in petty online skirmishes.
As Starfield nears its launch, there’s a desperate need to prioritize constructive feedback over destructive trolling. The many platforms like Metacritic need to step up and address the issue of review bombing more actively. Because as we delve into the expansive universe that Starfield promises, it serves as a stark reminder: while there will always be black holes of negativity in the gaming world, the brilliance of genuinely starry experiences should, and must, outshine them.
Let’s hope the conversations we have post-launch revolve around the game’s achievements rather than the foibles of its loudest detractors. Because in the end, the question isn’t just about how good Starfield is; it’s about what kind of gaming community we want to be.
