The Steam user reviews of Starfield, Bethesda Game Studios’ newest role-playing game, has begun its descent. The first IP from the studio in over two decades, which garnered significant attention before its full release, is disappointing players in various ways.
One of the primary complaints stems from Starfield’s user interface. The game’s UI is easily its Achilles heel, as it makes managing the plethora of items, resources, and stats essential for gameplay cumbersome. The base-building mechanic, although promising, ends up being a convoluted mess for players. There’s a consistent lack of clarity around which raw materials are required for which structures, and the game doesn’t help users understand what manufactured materials entail. As a result, it’s easy to find yourself trapped in a frustrating loop of trial and error. The inventory system isn’t any good either. With the vast amount of items one can accumulate, players struggle with understanding what they should keep or sell, exacerbating the already complex gameplay.
Comparisons to Bethesda’s previous iconic release, The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, surface, but not in the way the developer might hope. Instead of learning from past mistakes, Bethesda doubled down on one of Skyrim’s few glaring flaws – its interface. The changes in the interface seem random and unnecessary, further complicating an already daunting system. This, combined with poor optimization and extended loading screens, has considerably hampered the gameplay experience.
However, the woes don’t stop with the UI. The design choices for exploration feel puzzling and outdated. The choice to design planets similarly to the original Mass Effect, where you’ll land in planets with zero vehicles to help you explore, is perplexing. The act of walking between Points of Interest on vast, often barren terrains is a chore, leaving you feeling underwhelmed. This dated approach doesn’t make Starfield feel like a game that came out on current-gen consoles – it’s more like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion in this aspect.
Starfield’s economy could use some work as well. Selling spacecraft, one would assume, would fetch more credits. But, in Starfield, the value of a spacecraft seems oddly low. This skewed sense of in-game economy often makes some tasks, like combating pirates, more profitable than others that should logically have higher stakes and rewards.
Moreover, despite being marketed as a space exploration game, Starfield seems to limit the player’s actual experience of traveling through space. It lacks the thrill of take-off, flight, or landing as it relies on loading screens more often than it should.
It’s clear that Bethesda had a grand ambition. With countless locations and numerous gameplay systems, they aimed to give players a vast universe to explore. While this was a commendable goal, in practice, it seems that this expansive and never-ending scope resulted in many areas of the game feeling empty and uninspiring. The handcrafted sections of the game shine, but the extensive reliance on procedurally generated content dilutes the overall experience. It’s as if Starfield punishes you for exploring the world than rewarding you for it.
Feedback indicates that the enjoyment curve of Starfield is erratic. It’s a roller-coaster of emotions that sees players slog through the first few hours before the real fun begins. Then, the inherent flaws become more noticeable, making the overall experience tedious.
Ultimately, Starfield is a mix of Skyrim and Fallout but set in space. This isn’t inherently bad. There’s a market for such a game. But, it’s clear the game doesn’t meet the heightened expectations of many.
Starfield’s flawed execution, outdated mechanics, and underwhelming exploration elements hold it back from reaching the stars.
