“We’ve done more of it than we’ve ever done”: 1 Year Later, I’m Yet to Enjoy the Advantage Todd Howard Claimed Starfield Has Over Skyrim and Fallout

After years of anticipation, Bethesda’s Starfield debuted in 2024. The gigantic-space RPG was the company’s first new intellectual property in 25 years, and a lot is going behind it to be something special. Upon its release, the game was met with a positive reception, but that reaction didn’t last long as players felt the game lacked a soul.

Todd Howard and his team didn’t give up on the space RPG, though. In the last year, the team has brought various updates and even a full-fledged DLC for the game. However, amidst all that, I would like to ask where Starfield‘s “handcrafted planets” were supposed to give it an edge over Fallout and Skyrim.

Todd Howard Didn’t Deliver on Yet Another Thing With Starfield

Ahead of Starfield‘s release, many gamers were concerned about how Bethesda would use procedural generation technology. People felt that most of the game’s planets would be procedurally generated and wouldn’t feature the handcrafted content of the company’s other popular RPGs, such as Fallout and Elder Scrolls.

However, Todd Howard came out and confirmed that won’t be the case. It was stated that with more than 1000 planets for gamers to explore across the Milky Way galaxy, Starfield brings out the largest interactive spaces in the company’s catalog.

Howard stated that even though they’re procedurally generated, Bethesda has developed and handcrafted a lot of them and put in more work compared to the studio’s previous titles.

We’ve done more of it than we’ve ever done

However, I’d like to disagree on this one. Going into the game, I was lured by Howard’s promises and expected to see a truckload of awesome locations, enemies, and quests, especially those in high-level areas, but that wasn’t the case.

When I explored Starfield‘s various star systems, I came across just a handful of “unique” handcrafted locations. Even these didn’t feel like they had much work put into them and simply didn’t compare to what we had seen with Skyrim or Fallout. It genuinely feels like you’re walking into a procedurally generated simulator; you wouldn’t want to see these areas time and time again.

It’s clear that Howard and his team opted for the quantity over quality approach. Whether that’s positive or negative depends on the individual player. But I feel like if Bethesda had focused on diverting its resources on ten-hand-designed planets, the game would’ve felt alive and stood out among its competitors. It’s disappointing how Howard handled this title, considering it was his childhood dream.

Starfield Doesn’t Deserve a Sequel or Further Development

Recently, an ex-Bethesda developer stated that Starfield is now part of the company’s big three, right alongside the Fallout and Elder Scrolls franchises. Even Xbox boss Phil Spencer has revealed that he wants the IP to have the same longevity as Skyrim, a game that’s still enjoyed to this day.

With these things in mind, it’s quite clear that top executives want Starfield to continue with another entry, and while the details are still scarce, I don’t think the game deserves such a treatment.

It’s not just me; even the Steam reviews prove my point. Starfield doesn’t offer engaging characters or fun mechanics. All this game really brings to the table are boring planets and temples, disappointing space travel, and a failed storyline. I genuinely don’t think this game justifies the massive investment Bethesda has put behind it, and it’s a sinking ship the longer it goes on.

What doesn’t make sense to me is why Starfield is preparing for the sequel treatment while Microsoft continues to murder other studios. The tech giant murdered smaller studios like Tango Gameworks and Arkane Austin to focus on high-budget Bethesda games.

Disappointing triple AAA titles such as Starfield continue to dominate the industry unfairly and consume resources that could’ve gone towards supporting smaller and more innovative studios.

Despite making massive hits, games from such small studios don’t get sequels because of financial risks. Meanwhile, mediocre titles from Bethesda continued to get funded because of its brand, whatever is left of it.

It’s a really big issue in the gaming industry. Independent developers continue to suffer, and companies just want maximum profit maximization, ruining gaming for us.

With that said, do you think Starfield is Bethesda’s biggest failure? Let us know in the comments below.

This post belongs to FandomWire and first appeared on FandomWire