There is general idea among regular gamers that professional reviewers are basically being bribed to push game sales. While we cannot say that this is the truth in every instance, it is clear that there many journalists are no longer able to review games without trying to use them to prop up their factions in culture wars.
It seems to me that the video game reviewers have become more like political activists rather than people who are actually trying to play the games and show their thoughts on it.
Some of it is a cultural change in our culture. The video game industry was seen as a not serious industry by many governments. It was simply part of the entertainment industry, which in the highly technocratic era of the Post-World War 2, was not seen it as a threat to their power. However, more recently, people have started to take a closer look at video games.
Politics and video games do not really mix as video games unlike movies, were truly seen as diversions not were taken up by the avant-garde. This means that video games have been more a product of middle-class values and concepts
However, more recently, people who tend to be more political have been getting more interested into video games. With this attention, they are bringing along the baggage which has been hurting the industry and its ability to make games.
What we need to is to return to when Video Games were made for people playing games.
We do not need activists in our games. Neither should they be in any form of media. Activism in this age seems more of a way to help one’s side of an oligarchical system in America.
Video games should return to being about entertainment and telling an inspiring story that matters to people of all ages, races and abilities.
When the video game industry and its critics manage to stop being so elitist, then the industry will be able to make great games that people will purchase and cherish.
Big is necessary for change in the Video Industry, Starfield leads the way in that change.
It has been a very common complaint amongst Starfield players that the game is too big. This is one of the points against Starfield that I just cannot understand. The game was always meant to be large in scope and I find the complaints to be rather petty and lacking in substance. Starfield is a game that was made in the spirit of space trading games of the 1980s such as Elite Dangerous and Space Control but on much grander scale and with 3d visualizations of the planets. People who have played those games would understand what Starfield was doing in comparison with other games such as Skyrim. Unfortunately, because Skyrim sold so many copies, Starfield is literally in the shadow of that great game.
This shadow on Starfield is to its deteriment. There are too many people who just seperate Skyrim from Starfield and instead conflate the concepts of such games together.
Those two games were particularly very popular in the 1980s and 1990s but have since been submerged by titles such as the GTA series and the later Elder Scrolls games. Because of their obscurity, people do not really seem to understand what Starfield is really about. They just think that is a continuation of Skyrim even though that is not entirely the case.
Starfield harkens back to the Space Race
Starfield has an appearance that looks similar to Skyrim but it is really harkening back to those older space trading games. The second generation of video games often had many space games, generally made by the Japanese, such as Space Invaders and many others. Space in video games would be an incredibly important topic because video games grew up in the glow of the Apollo Moon landings and the construction of space stations by America and the Soviet Union. Many of those in the nascent industry were big fans of space even if they did not spend any time working in the actual machine that made the moon landings actually happen. Starfield is really more of a game for Gen X’s than the millennials. It harkens back to the afterglow of the years after Apollo missions.
Starfield isn’t a game that wallows in cynicism.
Starfield has often been compared to Mass Effect and how they differ in the content. I think that people’s reaction to Mass Effect being better than Starfield have to remember that Mass Effect was never particularly a very consistent story. Many players who are criticizing Starfield for being outdated and being too big should understand that Starfield was meant to be an ambitious game. It was not meant to be reliant on old ways of showing space exploration.
Starfield is about compromise and innovation in games
There are not many games that do what Starfield does. While players can complain about Starfield and say that its realism is what messed up the game, I think that it adds to the game’s character. It makes it different from other games. While it may not be the most innovative game ever made, it is getting difficult to truly make an innovative game these days anyway. Bethesda’s structure with its game is reaching an apex with Starfield. However, I believe that Bethesda still has much that it can improve upon this model that it has. The Elder Scrolls and Fallout games have been in state of change since Bethesda has been making them. Starfield is essentially an attempt to combine Elder Scrolls and Fallout together into one package.
The size of Starfield is to be expected from a developer such as Bethesda. They have been making such huge games for many years and they won’t be stopping making those games. The planets in the game are all varied and have a variety of biomes. They could have easily made the game into what we saw with Star Wars, where most of the planets have only one biome. However, the game provides a variety of environments that will help to help to keep the game fresh and interesting.
The main issue with Starfield at the moment is that the planets are either too big or do not have enough content. I think that because this game is so big that players often lose a sense of perspective with such games. I think that Bethesda was aware that this would be case but I think that they understand that criticism is going to happen with these games. They made Arena and Daggerfall so many years ago and Starfield is simply a new version of such a game.
Daggerfall in particular is a very similar game to Starfield in many ways. While the graphics in Starfield are immensely more complex in Starfield, there is a significant connection between these two games. It is the scale. I believe that the scale in Daggerfall was pushing the limits of computer technology in 1996. Starfield is doing the same thing as Daggerfall was in 1996 and I think that over time that the game will gain more respect as time goes on.
I am confident that Bethesda will continue to improve the game and keep the haters at bay and give us something incredible and interesting to play on our computers. I hope that the developers are able to achieve this.
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim was released some 12 years ago this year and yet it seems to be no less than relevant than today. The game has sold millions upon millions of copies, putting it up there as a gaming phenomenon that can hold its own with Street Fighter and Super Mario Brothers. It has been truly a game of the Millennials who have often been in the shadow of the Gen Xers. However, unlike the games in the 1990s, the games today seem to be taking longer to have sequels. The length of time between sequels is getting longer and longer and it is taking a toll on video game development. Some of my favorite games are taking so long that I am wondering whether these games will ever be released before being cancelled by executives who are trying to show their stockholders that the company will actually make money. This is the great dilemma that all big video game companies face. While smaller companies can make quirky games that enhance the medium, it is very difficult now to have a small company be able to make a game that will move the medium. It is very important to not be overly cynical about the Rockstars and the Bethesda’s in the gaming industry; they play vital roles in making video games even more important in the eye of the public, especially among more skeptical parts of the public who still believe that video games are simply electronic toys.
I believe that this issue is often overlooked by many gamers. The video game industry had to overcome many stereotypes and hurdles after Atari was flooding the market with poor games in the early 1980s. In spite of all the advancements, video games are still given this treatment of being a something that is immature and not worth the attention of adults who are serious. Independent video game makers are responsible for helping the industry breakout of its dependency on massive teams, corporate meddling and obsession with graphics. However, we still need the AAA games. Many independent games are nostalgic rather than moving the medium in another area. We need both AAA and independents, but it is truly the games with the big budgets that will change how people perceive video games.
However, the issue arises when a game has not had a sequel for so long that people seem to attach so many sentiments to that game. People no longer seem to have a rational opinion on the game and seem to think that the game was the holy standard upon which every game was built. This is the problem that Rockstar Games faces with Grand Theft Auto VI. The previous game has been out for so long that the expectations are really high for the next game. I worry that Rockstar has peaked with the previous game, Red Dead Redemption II and that they won’t be able to meet expectations.
Oblivion excels at creating a magnificent environment to play in.
The YouTube Aristocracy and Video Game criticism
This is same problem that Starfield faces. The game was a passion project of Todd Howard and people are constantly criticizing the game for not being Skyrim. It isn’t supposed to be Skyrim and I think that people are unfairly comparing the game to Skyrim.
Skyrim was produced long before Starfield and I think people have got to give Starfield a chance. This is one of the reasons that I continue writing about this game no matter what people say about it. It is important that people who love this game speak up about this game.
Skyrim has been with us for so long that it seems that the whole RPG genre seems to revolve around it. Rockstar’s games are also contributing to this idea that the genre needs to be prefect and that every imperfection means that the game is not worth playing. People have to stop having such unrealistic expectations.
Bethesda did release the Elder Scrolls Online but players are waiting for the real sequel to the Elder Scrolls. By spending so much time on developing this game, Bethesda may setting up for even greater issues with the release of Elder Scrolls VI.
Starfield has had to deal with the YouTube aristocracy trying to call this game a mediocre game that will go nowhere. People have to understand that Skyrim was being heavily criticized in 2011 and 2012 by the YouTube critics as well. There were many people on the forums who were saying that this game was terrible and wasn’t anything like Oblivion.
Of course, it seems that the people who love Skyrim now and the positive vibes that it gets from people are probably Millennials who seek to claim Skyrim as a part of their popular culture identity. This is one of the reasons that Skyrim has been so dominant for so long in the imagination of the Millennials. Starfield is having to go up against years upon years of people trying to hold to onto this ideal of Skyrim and what it meant to them.
The Elder Scrolls Oblivion has incredible architecture that is much better than Skyrim’s rather rustic approach.
Appreciating an Imperfect game and supporting it.
Skyrim is a great game, but I find that it is inferior to Oblivion in many areas. People are going to need to give up on the symbol of Skyrim as being this prefect game to compare everything to and start thinking realistically about how games are made. Whenever a new game is made, there are going to be changes to it. Not everything can be made into the most realistic game ever made. Skyrim even at the time was considered to have poor quality graphics compared to some other RPGs on the market.
I think in general that we players have become more and more cynical about the type of games that are coming out these days. I just wish that people would give Starfield a chance instead of constantly criticizing the game. Starfield may have NPCs that may look strange, but we have to understand that this is a game that has a lot going on under the hood. We have to respect that. When we consider that this game was released at all. We have to respect the endurance of the game developers who brought this game to life. Starfield could have easily been cancelled. Instead, it has been released into the public’s hands and we are having some very interesting mods being made.
We should try to look at the positive of what Starfield has managed to accomplish rather than tearing it down. People who are doing that do not understand how difficult developing games are. We need to stop criticizing Starfield so much and start appreciating it for what it has. We have a complete game, and we should proud of the work that Bethesda did on this game. We should be hopeful that they will continue supporting the game and working to make sure that it appeals to everyone out there is willing to take a chance with it.
My Game Reviews 