Review: ‘Starfield’ raises the bar with rich, engrossing universe

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 09/09/2023 (1123 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Bethesda Game Studios needed a win.

The developer’s last major release, “Fallout 76,” was a critical failure, due in part to Bethesda’s decision to stray from the “Fallout” franchise’s single-player roots and experiment with multiplayer.

And before that, “Fallout 4” released to mixed reviews, with many fans and critics comparing it unfavourably to earlier instalments.

Not since 2011’s “The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim” has a mainline Bethesda game enjoyed widespread critical acclaim.

With the release of the highly anticipated sci-fi epic “Starfield,” Bethesda is hoping to restore its reputation — to be known not as a maker of bug-filled games with thin storylines, but of captivating open worlds that beg to be explored.

“Starfield,” which came out on Sept. 6, is the studio’s first new universe in 25 years, as they were fond of reminding people during the hype campaign leading up to the launch.

The game, on its surface, is an open-world RPG set in a future where humanity has settled the stars and taken all of its baggage with it.

The story begins with the player joining Constellation, the last group of space explorers, as it seeks to unravel a mystery involving artifacts of unknown origin.

Like with most open-world games, however, the story in “Starfield” isn’t the point. That’s not to say the story is bad — it’s just not the reason to play, or replay, the game.

Regardless of how good an open-world RPG’s main campaign is — and unfortunately, they’re rarely that good — the story is usually secondary to the true star of the show: the world itself. Or in the case of “Starfield,” the more than 1,000 worlds.

Pete Hines, head of publishing for Bethesda Softworks, said during a livestream event at the recent Gamescom convention in Cologne, Germany, that “this game doesn’t even really get going until you finish the main quest.”

It’s not hard to see why. There are more than 1,000 worlds that the player can land on. Most of the environments are procedurally generated, but many planets have interesting areas and carefully crafted cities to get lost in.

That said, only a fraction of the worlds in “Starfield” are populated. Most of the planetary bodies are barren rocks with nothing but some resources to scan and gather. Many of the locations that you stumble upon on these random worlds are generic, seemingly copy-pasted.

None of this is exciting. And none of it is meant to be.

During the Starfield Direct showcase event in June, developers said they wanted to strike a balance between fun and realism. Though “Starfield” often favours realism, it’s important to note that video games don’t always need to be fun to be engaging.

“Starfield” can quickly shift from action to quiet exploration, to resource management, to base building, to space travel and back to action. Players aren’t forced to do everything, though, or to play a certain way. The philosophy that underpins every Bethesda open-world game is evident here: you get to choose how to play.

“Starfield” aims to instil in players a sense of wonder and curiosity, and encourages them to stop and smell the roses — or whatever the appropriate space analogue is.

Of course, this is still a video game, not merely “an experience,” and there needs to be fun gameplay.

There is, mostly.

The space travel is not as seamless as some people may have hoped — you can’t fly from system to system, or even between planets in the same system. Getting around in space largely involves fast travelling between points, which can break the immersion of role-playing as a starship captain.

The inventory system is clunky and the storage space is annoyingly small, even once it’s been upgraded.

Players will spend a lot of time looking at menus and will not be given much instruction on how to navigate the game’s various systems and mechanics.

The bugs that Bethesda games are known for are still present to some degree, though it’s a credit to the developer that relatively few of them exist in such an enormous game.

Like “Skyrim,” however, “Starfield” can’t be judged on its parts alone. Players of the former may recall poor facial animations; a wide range of bugs, from doors that wouldn’t open when interacted with to flying mammoths; bad melee combat; and other shortcomings. In spite of all that, “Skyrim,” at more than 60 million copies sold, is one of the bestselling video games of all time.

And any comparisons to other games that “Starfield” will inevitably draw may be fair, but also won’t paint the whole picture.

For instance, “No Man’s Sky” also involves resource gathering and visiting procedurally generated environments. The “Mass Effect” series also features a likable crew on a spaceship and travelling to different star systems to carry out missions. Some of the environments and technology may be reminiscent of “Cyberpunk 2077.”

But where “Starfield” is incomparable is its scope, ambition and attention to detail.

“Starfield” won’t be for everyone.

Those looking for a more linear, streamlined experience won’t get much direction or hand-holding. The game features gunplay as well as space battles, which may not appeal to those more interested in peaceful exploration. The game also rewards patience, so anyone in short supply may not enjoy the often-slower pace.

However, future games that fall under the open-world RPG and sci-fi umbrellas have a new standard to live up to. Bethesda sought to create The Space Game, and with “Starfield,” they’ve done it.

“Starfield” is available for $89.99 on Xbox and PC, and is free to download for Game Pass subscribers.

A digital version of the game’s premium edition was provided for the purposes of this review.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 9, 2023.