>>719905278
A textbook lesson in why a strong setting, solid worldbuilding, and interesting plot/characters are so integral to an open world RPG game, where the focus isn’t on any one particular mechanic being especially solid like in other genres eg platformers or pure shooters.

Starfield failed not because of any one mechanic being poor. It didn’t fail because of the admittedly lame lack of ability to actually fly your ship around, or because the planets had instanced cells and couldn’t be seamlessly traveled across.

Starfield failed because it was boring. Nothing about its setting was interesting or inspired player investment. None of the characters felt real or had any sort of interesting conflict/dynamic. Nothing in the plot was particularly compelling or made you think about your actions. The aesthetic and tone was so inconsistent that there was no memorable cohesive atmosphere that made you think “Starfield”. Take a game like New Vegas; janky, buggy, with many individual mechanics that are more limited and outdated than Starfield. Yet it’s still beloved and talked about to this day and still has higher concurrent player counts because its world, characters, themes, atmosphere, quests are all extremely memorable and interesting and make you think even when you’re not playing the game. Starfield does not have this, and so it was rapidly forgotten.