Video Game News: Starfield Manages To Make Modding Bad?

by Ashas Bukhari

Video Game News: Starfield Manages To Make Modding Bad?

12 Jul 2024

Eight years. That is how long it took Bethesda to make Starfield, and though this author was all aboard the hype train — because who does not want to explore new frontiers and discover new worlds — I must admit that I never picked up Starfield. Why? Well, it is complicated. I love the idea of Starfield, but not the video game itself. I even bought myself a limited edition Starfield Xbox controller. Which was a great buy, by the way, this thing reeks of quality.

A mile wide and an inch deep: Starfield

To explore the constellations, to go beyond where any human has gone before, to tread an unbeaten path has an allure to it, for gamers like this author, because it is dangerous, or at least supposed to feel dangerous and exciting. Starfield was supposed to give people like me a chance to live their boyhood dreams about being an astronaut, but instead, it suffers from a lot of all-too-familiar creative choices that colour modern media. That is, it feels safe. The creative team was too afraid to take risks and it shows. Starfield just felt devoid of danger and choices seemed inconsequential. Contrast this to the well loved Mass Effect series, which this author played the absolute daylight out of, and you might begin to see where I’m coming from. In the latter video game (yes, we all know about the ending, let’s not dwell on it, and no, we don’t talk about Andromeda), your choices could make or break civilisations, and in extreme cases, have characters self-delete. The stakes felt real, as did the characters. That is space opera done right. And let’s be honest, Bethesda’s extremely safe choices have not really helped Starfield at all.

Source: bethesda.net

At the time of writing, it has an overall review score of “mixed” on Steam, and a recent review score of “mostly negative.” Alright, I hear you say, why are we walking about a game we don’t like? Good question! Here is the thing - any gamer knows that a bad video game can be salvaged by mods. For those of you who don’t speak nerd, mods, or modifications, are community made changes in a video game. Depending on how mod-friendly a game’s source code is, mods can completely overhaul a video game and breathe new life into it. Mods have kept old games alive well past their expiration date, As in the case of S.T.A.L.K.E.R: Call of Pripyat, or they can turn mediocre video games into must-play masterpieces, like what Divide et Impera (DeI) did to Total War: Rome II. Rome II was the last Total War game this author bought, and I only still have it installed because DeI. Without DeI, Rome II would have died years ago. So, what does this have to do with Starfield? Well, Bethesda’s latest foray into space came with a host of modding tools, and this was expectedly well received by the fans. However, this is also the reason behind all the “mostly negative” reviews. So how did Todd Howard manage to take a silver bullet and shoot Bethesda in the foot with it? Let’s find out!

Source: bethesda.net

How to kill a video game: mods

Bethesda Game Studios chief Todd Howard has addressed the backlash regarding paid mods for Starfield, indicating that the developer will review its pricing model for Creations content.

On Steam, Starfield's recent user reviews have shifted to "Mostly Negative" after players expressed their dissatisfaction with Bethesda's $7 charge for a single mission of the video game. The second mission of the newly released Trackers Alliance, available only as a Starfield Creation, costs $7 or 700 credits. Creations, which are built using Starfield’s Creation Kit, include both free and paid mods, but paying for mods has always managed to rally any player base to hand out universal condemnation. The top review for Starfield on Steam, written by a user named Asyxa, reads:

“Another push for curated paid mods no one asked for? Are you this desperate for modders to fix your game on a budget, instead of doing it yourself with developers on an actual payroll? There is a simple reason why many players and modders enjoy modding their games for decades: It is done as a hobby, for players by players, without corporate responsibilites (sic) and apart from donation opportunities, without asking for or expecting monetary compensation. You are not aiding modding in the slightest. You are trying to turn modding into a business opportunity…” This author’s favourite review, written by user Putrefy, reads: “you can unlock positive review (sic) by paying 7usd.”

Ouch.

Source: news.xbox.com

Bethesda responds to the backlash

The current backlash focuses on The Vulture mission, but Bethesda has faced similar criticism over paid mods in the past. The studio's ongoing efforts to incorporate paid mods into its games have not been well received by some players.

In an interview, Todd Howard acknowledged the criticism and confirmed that Bethesda will reassess its pricing for Creations content. Howard mentioned that pricing is based on past experiences with older video game titles like the Creation Club and Fallout 76. He emphasised that Bethesda is committed to ensuring they provide value and will make adjustments where necessary.

Howard explained that The Trackers Alliance was an effort to combine special outfits and weapons with a quest, but the feedback indicated that this approach was not well received. Bethesda will consider changing how they deliver content, potentially altering pricing or how content is packaged.

Despite the criticism, Howard reiterated that Bethesda's policy on paid mods aims to support the modding community. He highlighted the importance of ensuring that creators, many of whom have transitioned from hobbyists to professionals, receive monetary rewards for their work with a beloved video game.

by Ashas Bukhari