Why Starfield is an Accessibility Embarrassment
We need to have a conversation about Starfield. In June, I wrote a story highlighting disabled players’ concerns regarding the lack of accessibility information for a game that’s been in development for years. We had no information aside from a brief mention of larger fonts from Todd Howard on Kinda Funny’s Xcast. Disabled people were cautious at best, and terrified at worst. And unfortunately, their fears were ultimately correct.
From an accessibility standpoint, Starfield is the most perplexing game I’ve played in years. Its accessibility menu is minuscule, but its control rebinding is almost flawless. It features numerous inclusive designs beneficial for an array of disabled players, but it locks them away behind specific missions. For this month’s Access Designed, I’m not going to review Starfield. Disabled voices have already expertly critiqued why this game fails. Instead, I want to examine my time with Starfield, my relationship with previous Bethesda titles, and how Xbox cannot be the ultimate savior of accessibility.
Starfield is a deeply flawed game. Its accessibility successes are consistently outmatched by what the title noticeably lacks. I am appreciative of options like auto-movement and auto-sprinting, especially when exploring expansive planets, but it’s difficult to find suitable key combinations to activate these features when some of my buttons conflict with each other. I wish more games would separate keybinds into different menus like Starfield, but it’s beyond frustrating when specific inputs I need for my Outpost clash with standard gameplay. Even with secondary inputs, my limited reach means I can only use a maximum of 13 mouse buttons and keyboard keys. Starfield doesn’t allow that.
What frustrates
Read more on ign.com
