HomeStarfield seems to be getting negative reviews on Steam

Starfield seems to be getting negative reviews on Steam

Published on


Starfield’s sales aren’t as high as they were expected to be, which could be a problem.

The Steam user reviews of Starfield, the latest game in the Bethesda Game Studios, have begun its evolution. A few different things do seem to have the first IP from the studio in over two decades. It went well before releasing it full.

One of the primary problems lies in the user interface of Starfield. The application of the game easily looks a little over its Achilles heel, as it puts its worth in the multipossible, multi-purpose role. Even though he’s promising, this mechanic is going to be dangerous for the players. The game doesn’t let users understand what production materials have to offer. This is a very simple way to get stuck in a frustrating loop of mistakes and test. No inventory works either. As you can see from the vast amount of items that you can accumulate, the players struggle to understand what they should keep or sell, exacerbating the complex gameplay.

Comparing to Bethesda’s original iconic release The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, surface, but not on the kind of way that a developer would hope. Bethesda, instead of learning from past mistakes, used the two-nine interface of Skyrim, to make fun of the most obscure. The changes in the interface seem random and unnecessary, thus complicating an already daunting system. The gameplay experience had a huge impact with this combined with poor optimization and extended loading screens.

Starfield didn’t boast a high Early Access number, but they didn’t get very well when the game started.

Unfortunately the problems aren’t stopped with the UI. The ideas for exploration look boring and outdated. The choice to develop a set of planets exactly the same as that originally generated Mass Effect, where you land in planets with zero of vehicles to make you explore, is worrying. It’s hard to walk between Points of Interest on wide, often barren terrains. It makes you feel underwhelmed.

Starfield may also use some work to fuel its economy. On my own, selling spacecraft would fetch more. In Starfield, the price of a spacecraft seems uninteresting. This skewed sense of in-game economy often makes many tasks, like combating pirates, more profitable than others that logically have higher stakes and rewards.

Starfield does not sound like a space exploration game and doesn’t allow the player to travel through space. It loses the thrill of taking off, flight, or landing because it increasingly relies on loading screens as much as it should.

As big as Starfield is, it looks like it’s relatively niche.

It’s clear that Bethesda had a big ambition. With its countless locations and its many gameplay features, they wanted to give players a vast universe of options. Even though this was a great goal in practice, it seems that this expansive, never-ending scope ended up making many areas of the game uninterested and inspiring. The handcrafted game does shine, but its extensive use of procedurally generated content is a discontent for the entire experience. It’s too much more as if Starfield punishes you for trying out the world than reward you for it.

Feedback indicates that Starfield’s enjoyment curve is erratic. It’s a roller coaster of emotions that sees players slog through first hours before real fun begins. Then, the inherent flaws become more visible, making the entire experience messy.

Starfield is about to mix Skyrim with Fallout, but will be confined to space. That’s inherently bad. There’s a market for such a game. It’s clear that the game didn’t meet many high expectations.

The good news is that most of Starfield’s flaws can be fixed.

Starfield’s failures and a lack of accuracy, or lack of quality and underwhelming exploration elements hinder it from reaching the stars.

Latest articles

More like this