Summary
- Bethesda is responding to negative Starfield reviews on Steam, acknowledging the criticism and attempting to address it.
- The main issues cited in the negative reviews are Starfield's lackluster exploration and lack of depth, with players feeling that the game becomes dull and tedious.
- Despite its initial excitement, Starfield has received mixed ratings on Steam and is currently Bethesda's lowest-rated game on the platform, with players comparing it unfavorably to Bethesda's previous titles like Fallout 4 and Skyrim.
Bethesda is responding to negative Starfield reviews on Steam, which is something of a rarity for triple-A developers. While the initial excitement propelled Starfield into stardom, many of its players have become somewhat disillusioned with the game after the honeymoon period ended. The inability to establish a consensus in the community has earned Starfield a mixed rating on Steam, as the latest Bethesda title is also the company's lowest-rated game on the platform. Though Starfield has its share of bugs, the criticism levied against it primarily concerns its design choices.
Procedural generation remains a contentious topic among Starfield fans, as this decision made during its development arguably created more content at the expense of depth. On paper, Starfield adheres to the defining maxim of a Bethesda sandbox: there's always something to be found over the next hill. In practice, the over-reliance on procedural generation and subsequent lack of variety resulted in many players characterizing Starfield as dull or boring, despite featuring inspired systems such as the ship builder.
Starfield's Steam Reviews Are No Longer Mostly Positive
Starfield's Steam reviews are no longer 'Mostly Positive,' as many players currently express discontent with various aspects of the game.
Over the course of November 2023, Bethesda attempted to soothe the frustration by replying to some of the negative reviews from Steam. The main issues cited in these reviews were either Starfield's lackluster exploration, or the game's lack of depth. Below is an example Steam review posted by a player who logged 54.5 hours into Starfield, followed by a response from Bethesda_Kraken, a member of the Bethesda Customer Support team.
The quote mentioned in the Bethesda reply references Ashley Cheng's statement from a New York Times article. Many players have since pointed out that there is a world of difference between going to the moon and waiting for a loading screen to load the moon in a video game. While some fans have surveyed all the planets in Starfield, the myriad of negative reviews imply that this experience feels more like a chore than a journey – a sharp contrast to the Commonwealth from Fallout 4 or Skyrim, whose rich, handcrafted areas still draw in a sizable crowd even a decade later.
In fact, Skyrim currently has more players than Starfield, reflecting the overall sentiment that Bethesda fans have with its latest release. Though Bethesda should be commended for reaching out to negative reviewers, a few people have pointed out that the stock responses on Steam, such as the one posted by Bethesda_FalcoYamaoka on a different Starfield user review, don't produce a lot of faith or goodwill. It once again references Ashley Cheng's statement, and seems to dodge the player's critique instead of addressing it.
It's obvious that Bethesda isn't happy with the response that Starfield has gotten since launch. Todd Howard recently mentioned in an interview that it took 7 years of tinkering for Starfield to become fun to play, but it seems that it may still need a few months of development. Fortunately, Bethesda has assigned about 250 developers to work on Starfield, and the game is expected to receive substantial post-launch support in the form of DLCs and expansion packs.
Starfield
-
OpenCritic Reviews
- Top Critic Avg: 85 /100 Critics Rec: 83%
WHERE TO PLAY
- Platform(s)
- PC, Xbox Series X, Xbox Series S
