Even before its release, Starfield sparked heated discussions, but it was after the release that things really took off: Despite solid ratings, players are actively debating the quality of the role-playing game.
As a result, the space adventure has accumulated a considerable number of user reviews on Steam: Over 80,000 have now been gathered, with only 69 percent of them being positive. Bethesda has now started to respond to the criticism and justify certain design decisions. However, the developer is mainly met with mockery from the community.
Starfield: ‘Some of Starfield’s planets are supposed to be empty’
Bethesda’s customer support has apparently been taking the time to respond to user reviews on Steam since early November and has been composing quite detailed answers. The always polite reactions, which occasionally read strongly like justifications, have now left the realms of Steam and landed on Twitter, where they are unexpectedly gaining a lot of attention.
Please follow us on Twitter and Facebook.
User JuiceHead33 shared three screenshots of Bethesda’s responses, which may not sit well with more critical fans. One of them, in particular, addressing the accusation of empty planets, sounds like blaming players for the lack of fun: ‘We’re sorry that you don’t like landing on planets and finding many of them empty. Some of Starfield’s planets are supposed to be empty – but that’s not boring. When astronauts flew to the moon, there was nothing there. But they certainly weren’t bored.’
Bethesda is responding to negative Starfield reviews on Steam. Absolutely bizarre if you ask me and despite media attention this hasn't stopped, the last response is from today pic.twitter.com/ay589tg8cc
— JuiceHead (@JuiceHead33) November 28, 2023
The intent of Starfield’s exploration is for players to feel small and overwhelmed. You can continue to explore and find worlds where useful resources or hidden outposts await,’ explains support. The comparison doesn’t sit well with players and reignites the familiar discussion of realism versus enjoyment.
Bethesda defends loading times
Another reaction regarding loading times also seems strangely defensive: ‘Even if there are loading screens when fast traveling, think about the amount of data for the expansive, procedurally generated gameplay that loads smoothly in less than three seconds. We believe this weakness will not deter our players from getting lost in the world we’ve created.’
In our Starfield review, the travel system from planet to planet and the often empty surfaces were also criticized, aligning with the player feedback Bethesda is receiving on Steam.
But what is your stance on the developer’s responses? Do you find them appropriate or even commendable? Or do they come across as desperate justifications to you? Feel free to share your opinion in the comments on our social media.
Related:
STARFIELD UPDATE INTRODUCES DLSS ON PC, DRASTICALLY IMPROVING PERFORMANCE
