Codex: I'm too cool for walking simulators
also Codex: I'm so very angry that I can't walk a straight line for 40 minutes on an empty planet without a load screen. because that's what I really wanted to do in this game
Zionbrah with his usual 4chan/reddit tainted shill take. We all knew Starfield would be a shit game specifically designed for niggers by a bunch of landwhales from the day it was announced, the BG3 coomers smoking the same copium pipe they've been inhaling since Oblivion would have you believe it will be worth it for pornography. Mods have never fixed a Bethesda game, the "adult" content is dogshit that can only appeal to permavirgins like Crispy or a teen who hasn't yet seen a woman naked in person.
Why is it important that you're going to hit an invisible wall and that the area you land on is a couple of instanced GameBryo cells thrown together at random? Because the entire draw of the space exploration genre is the freedom that implies. As shit as "immersive" exploration walking sims are the implication is that you as the player is put into the gameworld and free to do whatever you want unrestricted. The excuse for the shit combat since Ultima 7 has been that being able to go anywhere and do whatever has been worth the tradeoff. It's shit because it doesn't contribute to gameplay, but the same is the case for all of Bethesda's features. How does giving the player the ability to stuff a room full of cheesewheels (or more appropriately watermelons) into a tiny room make the game better? Imsims might have some wishywashy excuse of the player being able to stack them to climb a fence or use them as projectiles with telekinesis against lactose allergic enemies or something. Bethesda games don't.
The retarded Toddian sales pitch, that you can go wherever you want, do whatever you want, is the glue that binds the 15 year old's porno mods together. It also happens to be the fantasy of space games that feature planetary landings and procedural generation. You can't buzz over an abandoned alien ruin, land, and investigate at will. See those points of interests on the map? They're not really on the same planet, or even same dimension. Not only is the player unable to land the ship himself, use a vehicle to take in the scope of how large a planet can be, but the generated zone goes against all the principles of this sort of game. The worst thing you can do in an Ultima clone is to limit the player, to have houses you can't enter for no good reason. Being without something in the distance that the player wants to get to. The whole idea behind this niche is that the game isn't built like a movie set, that there is something behind each door and no artificial limitations. Without that Bethesda games have nothing.
What makes it more embarrassing is that Sean Murray and a small indie team of developers delivered on the promise of a fully explorable space sim with seamless landings from space to ground, and that was back in 2016, on the previous gen hardware. See that house? You can enter it. See that horizon? You can drive there. The scope is delivered on, even if the game itself could never compete with entirely handcrafted cinematic set pieces that games like Mass Effect and others have delivered. No space station in No Man's Sky can ever be as great as in Alien Isolation, and the world space can never be as interesting to explore as Outer Wilds (which also had seamless and totally freeform travel in one star system, made by five guys with a budget of a packet of bubble gum and a couple of toothpicks). But it did make good on the scope and you're never going to face invisible walls in that game.
Ever since Morrowind Bethesda has been marketing their games on the promise of tiny handcrafted square sandboxes with unrivaled freedom (not that this was ever used for anything remarkable in terms of gameplay, it's shallow as a puddle). This game flushes that down the drain.