Starfield developer explains why planets are “meant to be empty by design”
destructoid.comA Steam user decided to post a lengthy review of Starfield which ultimately gave it a thumbs down. On Halloween, a Bethesda developer responded with an explanation of why some of the design choices were made.
Soso’s main complaint is that the gameplay feels flat at every turn. According to Soso, most missions are boring fetch quests and there’s no variation in how you can approach problems. The combat is also very shallow with not much variety in terms of enemies encounters, Soso complains.
The review also argues that exploration is boring because the galaxy is empty and the settlements are uninteresting. It also takes issue with the fact that you can’t manually travel between planets, reducing much of the exploration into a matter of fast traveling.
Lastly, Soso criticizes the missions. They claim there are too few of them, and while there are a couple of good questlines, the bulk of them aren’t captivating. The scathing review concludes with the damning statement that “Starfield is a major step back not just from the general gaming industry, the RPG genre, but Bethesda themselves.”
A Bethesda developer with the username Bethesda_FalcoYamaoka responded by explaining some of the decision-making processes behind the game. They point out that some of the planets are meant to be empty because that’s how space exploration really is. Furthermore, developers wanted Starfield‘s exploration to “evoke a feeling of smallness in players and make you feel overwhelmed.”
They also rebut some of the points made by Soso. The developer argues that missions can be tackled in different ways, and at different points in the game, you make critical decisions, such as which characters die.
The developer also offers some suggestions to make
Read more on destructoid.com
