Starfield has faced criticism focusing on its tedious gameplay and reliance on procedural generation, leading to a comparison with Obsidian's The Outer Worlds 2. While Starfield offers a glimpse into a human-driven space experience, former Bethesda designer Bruce Nesmith highlighted its shortcomings in making space exploration engaging. The vast emptiness of the game, combined with repetitive elements, has left players feeling bored. Despite its commendable storytelling, the game struggles with its scope, diluting the immersive experience and producing an overflowing universe with little variation. A future Starfield sequel could benefit from tightening gameplay focus, prioritizing character interactions and story depth over sheer scale, much like renowned RPGs have successfully done in the past.

What are the main criticisms of Starfield's gameplay?

Main criticisms of Starfield's gameplay include its tedious exploration, reliance on procedural generation, and an overwhelming but empty universe that lacks meaningful content. Players often feel the game is repetitive and not engaging, leading them to prefer more focused gameplay experiences that prioritize narrative and character interactions.

Starfield, developed by Bethesda Game Studios, marks the studio's first foray into space RPGs, building on their reputation from franchises like Elder Scrolls and Fallout. It was highly anticipated due to its promise of an expansive universe and complex narratives. However, its launch experiences have sparked debate on the effectiveness of procedural content versus handmade narratives in creating immersive worlds.