Minor Starfield lore spoiler's ahead

Originally written for /r/games, but the last discussion thread of Starfield in that place saw many user who said they personally like the game downvoted and replied to by mentally-questionable individuals that said not-so-nice things.

As I pass 170 hours in Bethesda newest, hottest, controversial game. I am happy because it is just as fun as I had hoped it to be.
Yet as I explore the cities it has to offer there is always a small detail that I keep failing to ignore (whenever I'm not busy thinking of new ship designs that is).

200,000 units are ready with a million more on the way

So say the slender being that has been tasked with creating an army to defend a galactic spanning government of countless worlds. At this point Montgomery, Zhukov, MacArthur, Jodl, or any-other-WW2-command-figure-of-your-choosing are rolling on the ground clapping each other's backs laughing their socks off. Because 1.2 million is an absolutely puny and pathetic number of troops for a galactic war.
I'm no Star Wars deep lore fan, I understand that fans and later authors has since tried to 'fix it' by making the Clone War more that just the clones. And yet those 1.2M clones was all there was when episode 2 released to theatres.
Most Sci-fi writings has similar a problem with scaling to their subject. It is not news. It even has a tv tropes page (the page is more about distances, but it's in the same ballpark).

Quest for the Peoplefield

So where does Starfield go wrong in this? The ships are puny. The wars and the numbers stated are puny.
Certainty more ways than one, but the one that I wish to focus on is this: where the hell are all the people?
A brief summary of the lore. Humanity has invented FTL and has seemingly solved all energy problems. They had to evacuate Earth, but this was successful and so the starfield should be absolutely teeming with tens of billions of human souls spreading to all corners of the galaxy and its many already habitable worlds.
And yet, Starfield feels so barren. I see no grand interstellar civilizations. Only dirt huts on a hill surrounded by walls that support barely a thousand people. Yet this dirt hill is supposed to be a capital or an interstellar superpower. Heck, they are even scared shitless of their own fauna.
The opposites capital is no dirt hill, yet still smaller than a modern earth country town.
And it's not like the main population centers are just outside player-accessible areas. All the NPCs ever talk about are Akila, New Atlantis, and Neon. These tiny puny cities.
It doesn't feel like the evacuation of Earth was a success. It feels like it was a catastrophe, and all that remains are scattered remnants playing civilization.

And yet... The Starfield is actually lively, just not where it should be. There is a scale imbalance, because spread across nearly every world in the settled systems are countless research stations, outposts, deserted or populated, you name it.
Yes, those procedually-generated buildings that spawn nearly everywhere you land in the settled systems.
Where did these come from? Surely the UC couldn't have built them. Manning just the ones that I have come across in my playthrough would empty New Atlantis 10 times over!

Bethesda built their open-world game style upon Fallout and Elder Scrolls. For both it makes sense that the worlds are sparely populated. One being post-apocalyptic wasteland, and the other a medieval society.
But now they have built something in a completely different realm. But they way in which Bethesda built the scale at which the game is presented remains the same.
So why did they go with this approach? I don't know. Maybe they just like making "small" worlds and didn't want to fit the new universe. Maybe the idea of 'climbing any mountain you can see' is a very hard rule and they didn't want to limit player movement in metropolises, that would undoubtedly be unfeasible to make fully traversable.

But lets pretend they actually tried. And perhaps it can be done without really changing how the game is designed or played.

So you can do it better huh?

A Microsoft executive plays the game as it's nearing launch. He feels there is something missing with the scale of the Starfield universe.
So he does the only rational thing he can think of and storms into the street and picks the first rando he can find, puts the Bethesda crown upon his head, and orders him to fix Starfield's problem of scale.
The exec is later found to be mentally ill and fired, but it does not matter for I am now king of Bethesda and my words are design directives.

Tell, don't show

The simple solution that requires no real work but some change in lore. New Atlantis is no longer a capital, just a administrative and diplomatic outpost. Akila is now just a small border city. The real population centers are now on entirely different worlds. Inaccessible to the player.
Why can't players go there? Well it shouldn't take much suspension of disbelief to acknowledge that governments might not want any random idiot, in a flying hunk of metal capable of tearing space-time at it seams, to go anywhere near their main population centers without considerable control.
NPCs should no longer talk of sprawling New Atlantis, Neon, or Akila, but rather these other places that you can see on the map but are not allowed to go to.

Show enough

The population planets are now accessible, but restricted in where you can land freely. On the map it should show big cities. And just like how you cannot land in water, you can neither land anywhere in cities or its surroundings.
Just like with New Atlantis and Akila, you can land at a designated spot. The difference is when you look into the horizon, because rather than a procedurally generated landscape you will instead see a sprawling metropolis that tells you "Yes here! Here are all the people!".
The other change would be that, unlike the landscape, if you try to go beyond the player-area of the city you will hit a wall. But that is a sacrifice I am willing to make.
New Atlantis and Akila can stay, but like the other solution they would change status.

All in all the scale issue is no big problem and the game is fine as it is. This was just something that has been on mind for some time and I wanted to put it to writing. So do you agree that Starfield has a scale problem? If yes, how would you fix it? Or maybe I missed some crucial info-dump and the entire premise of this writing is wrong?

I had been waiting for this game since 2012, when it was first announced. I bought it day one, without reading any reviews, and it was an instant refund for me.

Now that update 2.0 supposedly makes the game better, I'm thinking of giving it another shot. Has anyone tried this update? What do you think about it?

Hey Tabletidlers,

Another week and another opportunity to share what you've been playing.

For me I was able to finally play the Zombie Apocalypse map for Age of Steam. This map sees you delivering goods (cubes) around a map of Michigan as usual, but whilst dealing with the map evolving due to a horde of zombies. The zombies move in a deterministic manner, so it's possible to plan ahead, but towns or cities the zombies reach are razed, which converts them to a colourless city and removes any cubes upon them. The zombies also add a cost to building track and add a cost to delivering cubes, unless you take the Military Caboose action, which replaces the normal Locamotive spot. Very enjoyable map and the random starting location for the seed zombies means it'll play very differently, I imagine, each game.

So, don't be shy, share what you've managed to get played this week.

So, by now everyone knows about the big outcry over Unity's big runtime fee. Even if they backtrack, I foresee MANY developers leaving Unity because the trust has been damaged. So there are two options to look at now: Unreal and Godot. I have no experience with Godot personally, but I know there are people on here who do.

So, to those with experience with it, here's the chance to share your expertise and knowledge! What do you want new users to know about it? What do you consider its strengths and weaknesses? What resources would you recommend for new users? Any particular tips and tricks? And also, what are some games you know made with it you'd recommend, either to give people ideas of its capabilities or just because they're good games?

For me, it's the intro cinematic to Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn. I never played the defunct 1.0 version of FFXIV, whose final moments are what this cinematic shows if you aren't aware, but there is something about seeing all the bloodshed and destruction while Answers plays in the background that makes an incredibly strong melancholy mood in the trailer and really sells the feeling of this being an end of an era for Final Fantasy XIV, both in-game and in real life. I have to imagine that it's only more poignant if you were one of the people there for the end of 1.0.

Time to share your weekly board gaming.

For me it consisted of a game of Aquanauts at a monthly gathering I've only attended for the second time. The host of the group posted about his new group in a village hall in the middle of nowhere (UK) over on Reddit. Well the middle of nowhere turned out to be not far from where I live so I've been trying to make it when I can ever since.

Aquanauts was published by a UK publisher Inside the Box Games (best known for Sub Terra) but they went bust recently and another company stepped in and fulfilled the Kickstarter. The game is a basic worker placement, where you're sending your robotic submersibles (workers) out to collect or convert resources. What makes it interesting is that the worker spots are linked, and playing a spot linked to another that has a player worker on it scores you both a bonus resource. You can also build tiles on your player board to similarly receive or convert goods during the income phase. Other than that, you're trying to load up a submarine with the correct resources to score contract cards, and there's a degree of hedging your bets as the person who takes the final slot on the submarine gets to choose the order in which the players claim contracts. It's a fairly good game, fun enough on first play but largely unmemorable.

Tonight I got in a game of Carnegie. This is a great game that sees you building up your office with departments, staffing them and sending your workers on missions to build buildings across the map of the USA, linking cities. I royally screwed up my first turn and spent several rounds trying to recover which left me way behind on points. Great game with a lot to think about but which neither takes too long to teach or play.

What have you all been playing?

Server host: tildes.nore.gg
Dynmap: https://tildes.nore.gg

The server operates on a soft whitelist. Anyone can log in and walk around, but you need a Tildes account to gain build access.

A lot of builds have been completed since the last thread. What have you all been up to?

Edit: If you would like to, you can help pay for the server costs on Patreon. So far I've been paying for it myself.

I just finished the Starfield main quest! Everything else will be in the Spoilerbox text but if you haven't, consider yourself warned! I would try and go through the main quest as much as you can and maybe a couple of temples before you finish the main story if you havent.

September's Humble Choice is now available with the following eight Steam games:

Does anyone have experience with any of the games and, if so, would you recommend them? Is there anything in here that you're particularly excited to play?