Starfield Is a Vast, Sprawling Video Game About the Fragility of State Power
The latest RPG from Bethesda Studios chronicles the unexpected ways that private, non-governmental power steps in to fill the gaps and voids left by state actors.

Few producers of popular entertainment have delved so thoroughly into the world of libertarian political ideas as Bethesda Game Studios, the video game studio behind a handful of enormously popular role-playing games, including this year's much-hyped, much-delayed Starfield.
The studio's Fallout franchise, for example, drops players into a bleak, satirical post-apocalyptic United States where the American government as we know it has been replaced by competing factions, each of which espouses their own values and ideals. Some believe in freedom and democracy while others focus on strength and security. Ordinary settlers, meanwhile, erect their own systems of subsistence, trade, conflict, and cooperation.
A fantasy franchise, The Elder Scrolls, tasks players with navigating complex feudal political systems, even as local holdouts engage in their own quasi-governmental activities—some peaceful and productive, some cynical and selfish—apart from the official state. The series' most recent installment, 2011's Skyrim, allows players to participate in an epic war between two sides: rural Nords who want to practice their religion in peace (but who happen to be racist against elves), and urban, educated elves who advocate for a diverse, cosmopolitan society (but who want to use state power to squelch the Nordic religion). Could that possibly be a metaphor?
These games are vast, taking dozens of hours to play, and giving players nearly unlimited freedom to explore large expanses of elaborately architected virtual territory, from rugged mountains to built-up cityscapes. Those territories are packed with people and stories, from shopkeepers and farmers to local warlords and rulers or wannabe rulers of every stripe, many of whom the player can speak and otherwise interact with. Those interactions are largely scripted by the game's designers, and at times the dialogue options can be limited. Yet what comes through from even the most basic in-game conversation is a sense that every character is driven by some sort of ethos or ideology—a politics of some sort—but also that every character is, somehow, a unique individual, with quirks and predilections that exist outside those political commitments.
A Bethesda role-playing game is best understood not as a linear series of pre-determined events with some player interaction but as a place, a territory, a country—or, given the political divides one encounters, countries. It tells not a single story, but a series of interlocked stories in the same sprawling setting; playing through one of these games is something like reading a massive volume of short stories set in the same universe.
All of this is true for Starfield, but even moreso. At heart, it's a game about the fragility and contingency of state power, competition between forms of government, and the unexpected ways that private, non-governmental power steps in to fill the gaps and voids left by state actors. And, too, it is a showcase for the influence of individuals—their quirks, choices, and tradeoffs, some of which prove more powerful than the systems in which they are embedded.
Starfield is set in the far future in which the Earth has been decimated but humanity has moved to the stars. After a bloody war, two rival states formed: The first is the United Colonies (the U.C.), which is centralized and bureaucratic, but safe, shiny, and rich. The second is the Freestar Collective, which is rough and tumble, more loosely governed and prone to lawlessness, but which allows merchants and entrepreneurs greater freedom to go about their business.
The game frequently highlights the differences between these two styles of government: One of the first snippets of dialogue the player hears after starting the game is a swipe at the U.C.'s bureaucratic burdens. As you walk through a deep space mining operation, the crew boss turns to another character and remarks: "Know what I love about working in Freestar Collective space? Fewer regulations. A job like this for the United Colonies would mean reams of red tape." From the outset, the game emphasizes ideas of political and regulatory competition and the effects of that competition on the marketplace.
But Starfield doesn't slot everything into a simplistic political binary. There are always other forms of governance, or quasi-governance, hovering at the fringes as well, many of which are more loosely organized. Early in the game, the player encounters LIST, the League of Independent Settlers, a ragtag group of settlers who find even Freestar's political structure too overbearing. They've struck out on their own, but without security infrastructure, they've found themselves beset by attacks from lawless rogues. As a LIST farmer explains, "The promise is freedom. True freedom. If you can fend off all the spacers and pirates the settled systems can throw at you."
Over and over again, the game raises the question of freedom. What does it mean? What does it entail? What costs does it impose? In Akila City, the capital of the Freestar Collective, players encounter an in-game information kiosk with a self-regarding retelling of the founding. It explains that the Collective's founder was an explorer who wanted to join with other like-minded explorers to travel and settle the stars. But the U.C. resisted. "Exploration was seen as aggression," the story goes. "Freedom, as defiance." Akila City was founded on a "commitment to freedom."
That commitment is reflected in smaller ways as well. The game allows the player to purchase property in Akila City. There's a realtor involved, and when you first encounter him, he's speaking with another prospective buyer who asks whether the property "is zoned for commercial use?" The realtor dismisses the idea of zoning entirely, saying, "This isn't the UC."
Both the U.C. and the Freestar Collective, meanwhile, hire what amounts to contract labor to bolster their security forces, sometimes dismissing formal training requirements that made staffing their police and military operations too difficult.
Beyond the main governmental entities, there are large corporations that sometimes seem to have governmental power, especially in the commercial city of Neon. Neon is run by a corporate council, and one of the game's more extensive series of linked missions allows the player to take a job as a corporate operative for Ryujin Industries, the city's most powerful corporation.
Yet even Neon's monied corporate overlords have limits: The streets of the city's poor neighborhood are run by gangs—and even in gang warfare, competing ideologies prevail. One group, the down-on-its-luck Ebbside Strikers, prides itself on a kind of business-like competence, in contrast to what they see as the near-psychotic violence of its rivals, the Disciples. The game treats these gangs as existing on a continuum, not only with each other, but with the governing corporations and political institutions above them; in the world of Starfield, political power always has limitations, and powerful institutions and ideologies almost always have rivals.
The main storyline, meanwhile, revolves around Constellation, which its leader describes as a "private organization dedicated to self reliance." The organization's chief financial backer is a space-hardware industrialist named Walter Stroud who spends part of the game trying to one-up a rival shipmaker. When he first introduces himself, he explains, "I'm a fan of self reliance." Later on, he expresses glee at the wildness of the "free market" in Neon City.
Not all of the game's social institutions are dedicated to power and violence. In the slums of New Atlantis, the capital city of the United Colonies, a woman named Kay runs a charity service for the downtrodden. The game features multiple religions, one with a bizarre theology and violent streak, another with a more peaceful outlook. There's even a sort of humanistic non-religion, the House of Enlightenment, dedicated to boosting humanity through peace and cooperation. As one of the organization's representatives says: "Belief is the problem, okay? We don't need a shared narrative or theology. We need to help each other, in practical terms."
If all of this sounds complex, well, in some ways that's because it is. The game's sheer sprawl and scale prevents easy summary or succinct analysis: Tellingly, the game's play counter keeps track of time in the game by number of days: As of this writing, I have nearly four whole days sunk into this game world—just shy of 100 hours—with hundreds of planets and quests and stories left to explore. I'll be playing this game for days and days to come.
That vastness, however, is what allows the game to explore such a wide range of governmental bodies and non-government systems, people and places, idiosyncrasies, and ideologies.
Players can choose how to move through this world, what sort of character to play, and what sort of stories and opportunities to pursue; I haven't even mentioned the game's ship and settlement-building systems, which add layers of resource management and habitation design on top of the more conventional story and action elements.
The sheer range of choices available to the player at any given moment is, in some sense, the point: Constellation's members spend much of the game waxing enthusiastic about the joys of exploration, the limitlessness of human potential, the lure of the stars.
But even more than that, Starfield, like Bethesda's early games, simply insists that people are different—delightfully and terribly and bizarrely and amusingly different. And those infinite, irreducible differences are what ensure that any putatively comprehensive system of human organization or political control will have gaps and limitations. Whether it's a democratic government, a pirate clan, a settler collective, or a monied corporation, no one system can capture and organize it all. But Starfield, like all of Bethesda's RPGs, comes about as close as anything.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
This review tells me you've never played one of their games.
None of the factions in FO believe in freedom and democracy. And the 'settlers' don't do *anything*. For two centuries! Until the PC comes around to guide them. This isn't libertarianism, it's an advertisement for the superiority of 'strong man' politics. Everyone must be lead.
The Free States in FO76 come the closest. And they're kind of paranoid (can't blame them) xenophobic stereotypical preppers.
The Minutemen. Just independent settlers banding together to form a volunary militia. Hence the name. But players hate it because it's not a standing army with dreams over power over all. Also why players hate the Railroad, who only want to free the synths and have no interest in lording power over all others.
But they're not.
1. The Minutemen are your private army.
2. The settlers are in autocratic enclaves that you literally personally plan. Physically and economically.
TES dropped the politics after Morrowind.
"but who happen to be racist against elves" - who made a war of cultural domination and religious genocide against them and even today oppress humanity.
Yeah, the Nords are against more than elves, and the Thalmor are kind of Na... assholes.
No one hates the Dunmer more than the Dunmer. True fact.
" I haven't even mentioned the game's ship and settlement-building systems, which add layers of resource management and habitation design on top of the more conventional story and action elements. "
And which are ultimately meaningless - they don't affect gameplay and are ignored by what little story there is.
So what? They didn't affect gameplay in Fallout 4 either, other than the artillery.
But starships in Starfield DO affect gameplay, in a huge way. And even outposts can serve as yuuuge money makers.
Starships don't affect gameplay. They're mostly for fast travel.
And you don't need money in BGS games because there's never anything worth buying.
"Starships don’t affect gameplay. They’re mostly for fast travel."
This is completely wrong. First, the size of your cargo hold directly effects how much trading you can do and having a large hold means your ship isn't as good in a fight. Secondly, you will be involved in ship combat, and that's direct gameplay. Third, your ship is your homebase that you can upgrade with crafting tables, additional crew slots, bigger cargo holds, larger jump drives, better weapons and shields and all of those effect game play.
Trading is pointless. What are you going to trade for? Money? To spend on nothing because you don't need more than what drops?
yesterday I was missing Spy Hunter
Now that one was fun.
I know a lot of people are playing it and loving it, but YAWN.
After Fallout, Bethesda is the one gaming company that continues to convince me I've outgrown video games.
The persistent lack of vehicles and penchant for travelling to places by walking there simultaneously triggers my deus ex machina (I hiked out of the Mojave and into Vegas in less than 5 min.? This entire city/realm/planet isn't much bigger than a golf course!) and my boomer sensibilities (JFC, traversing this golf course without a golf cart is getting fucking boooring!)
Fast travel should only happen via a menu. Or magic.
Too many loading screens.
> Some believe in freedom and democracy while others focus on strength and security.
Or are just evil and need to be eradicated.
> The series' most recent installment, 2011's Skyrim, allows players to participate in an epic war between two sides
But really there's the overarching battle against evil that threatens to consume both the sides.
> All of this is true for Starfield, but even moreso.
Except Starfield was developed after Bethesda fired all their good staff and replaced them with woke Karens who just want to virtue signal and/or complain about everything.
Third-wave Feminists are kind of like Grelod The Kind or Allistair Tenpenny.
Meaning you'll take a great deal of satisfaction splattering their brains across your screen.
While Bethesda put a lot in this game, they somehow neglected "fun."
These are also games about people at the fringes of society who survive and prosper because of exceptional strength and intelligence (plus the ability to backwards in time when they screw up). And the players in those games commit homicide by the thousands, rob and steal, and do dirty jobs for governments, criminal gangs, warlords, and kings.
Starfield is so good that I restarted a Skyrim playthrough with A Dragonborn’s Fate modlist and Oblivion using Through The Valleys modlist.
Both are awesome vanilla plus modlists. And even if you don’t like their respective overhauls (Simonrim for Skyrim, Ascent for Oblivion) they have the best foundations for stability and bug fixes incorporated into them. You can just install those utilities, bug fixes, and engine fixes, and either go nuts with your own preferred mods or play vanilla (with the standard caveat of going nuts with your own mods is always a gamble).
Also, kidding about Starfield. It's got some pretty cool shit going on, but I'm waiting for it to get some updates and for modders to address bugs, the awful inventory management, and some limitations that just make it a slog. I played 20 hours, like the combat, like the world, but man, the inventory management is a total slog. The shipbuilding is pretty sick, but again, I feel like modders are going to make it that much better.
They seriously need to work on their branding.
Unless that sort of thing make you horny.
Hahaha
There are a dozen mods centered around Adamant (the main overhaul), but the primary author of those dozen mods is this guy Simonmagus and Simonrim is the shorthand for the entire suite all together.
Your point still stands, sounds goofy as hell.
As long as the mods don't touch the pronoun mechanics, I'm good with it.
F
Didn't the DNC enact an official policy to 'press X to pay respects to BLM'?
Again, to me it's full-on, laugh-spittle-particles-in-their-face hilarious to hear people defend virtually every aspect of it especially by calling other people homophobes or transphobes.
It's a freakin' space game with no-shit aliens in it. Thirty years ago games like Master of Orion had both insect-like rigid-two-sex species with non-descript gender roles that, critical to the gameplay reproduced like crazy and the programmers, probably mostly all closed-minded cis-males, juxtaposed them against much more hardy but sexless silicon crystal species that lived for millennia and reproduced, much more slowly, by budding.
In a game genre that has untold vigintillions of mono-gender, sexless, budding, and endlessly breeding entities via all manner of mechanism mono-, poly-, trans-, and other *species* in it, Bethesda, in a nod to your open world embrace of gender non-conformance asked you for your pronouns and then kicked you in the groin like a regular human... and you *thanked* them for it.
LOL @ morons getting kicked in the groin.
But do they allow me to pick my genitalia?
Baldur's Gate III is that way ===>
Disappointed that I can't choose between average dick size, tiny dick, and giant horse cock.
Also, my penis should be allowed to identify as black even if the rest of me is green.
If I want a circumcised orc cock with vitiligo it's my right as a paying customer goddammit!
A Jew Orc?
I was actually wondering what the difference was between penis 1 and penis 2, because I couldn't tell. I either need new glasses or a new monitor.
It seems entirely plausible there’s nothing wrong with your monitor or glasses and that penis 1 is the male penis and penis 2 is the female penis, but I'm no Orc biologist.
So confusing. A male can have a male or female penis and a female can have a female or male penis.
I'm offended now, because they only had female vaginas no male vaginas.
I'd think you people were fucking crazy, like all wohoo and shit, but... well, it's the 2020s and parody is obsolete.
LIST, the League of Independent Settlers, a ragtag group of settlers who find even Freestar's political structure too overbearing. They've struck out on their own, but without security infrastructure, they've found themselves beset by attacks from lawless rogues. As a LIST farmer explains, "The promise is freedom. True freedom. If you can fend off all the spacers and pirates the settled systems can throw at you."
This is that moment when Libertopia realizes that borders can be meaningful.
We libertarians believe in maximum individual freedom from goverment, except those government functions that involve caging, killing, and restricting the movement of people.
Other than those things, freedom!
You'd be one of those guys protesting Israel while living in a house with a Safe room.
No, Tony, we libertarians believe that caging, killing, and restricting the movement of people are not proper functions of government; instead, we believe that they are properly carried out by private actors.
In space no one can hear you build a wall.
If a mime dies in the vacuum of space and nobody is there to hear it - does it make a sound?
The Bioshock series has the best treatment of libertarianism by a video game, by far.
“The Bioshock series has the best treatment of libertarianism by a video game, by far.”
Objectivism ≠ Libertarianism
Summary: You’re a dumbass.
If they remade bioshock, they'd have to stick a crazy-pants defense of Section 230 and support of government-censorship-as-long-as-it's-just-a-friendly-request in there.
I AM Making a Good Salary from Home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing, under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone. go to home media tech tab for more detail reinforce your heart
OPEN GO HERE↠↠↠ http://Www.DailyPro7.COM
The rage over this game on Steam forums is just crazy. It’s wokester versus anti-wokesters to an extreme I’ve never seen before, not even in the Reason commentariat.
Apparently an entirely optional choice of pronouns in the character creation screen will turn your children gay or something. Oh, and one of the main followers is gay. Oh the horror! There's even a thread about how horrible it is that there are "strong" females.
It's homophobic idiot leftists like you that believe such crap. In reality, us gay men use standard pronouns and have zero confusion about our sex/gender or the sex/gender of other humans.
Again, no one forcing you to choose a different set of pronouns.
No, but I prefer not to hang out with homophobic idiot leftists or support their businesses.
Yeah, everything I’ve seen is about misconstruing HeelvsBabyface’s criticism of the shittiest of shitty game mechanics, being used to create a sociopolitical author-insert that will obviously age like fine milk, as trans or homophobia.
As I point out above, for decades, the genre has had races/species that have no/one sex/gender right next to races/species that have exacting sex gender roles that are played out and enforced with brutal efficiency next to races that exist predominantly through parasitism of the other races/species, all of which are intrinsically woven into both the plot and the game play. And Starfield in it’s masturbatory awesomeness, celebrates the openness of the universe by asking you directly for your pronouns, in a very narrow Earth 2023 fashion, and then ignoring your selection for the rest of the game.
I’m tempted to say it would be worse if they’d used Clippy the Microsoft Office virtual assistant to help you select your preferred gendered pronouns, but I’m not even sure that’s true.
“It looks like you’re trying to explore the Universe. Would you like help selecting the pronouns that every other character in the Universe you haven’t yet begun to explore should automatically recognize based on you/your character’s human genitals?”
– Get help choosing pronouns.
– Just explore the Universe without getting help.
– Don’t ask me this question again.The applause for its inclusion are like the retards that applauded the idea that Prince Charming waking Snow White with a kiss constitutes a sexual assault.
Dude, go look at the BG3 forums and prepare to be dazzled. There's thousands of threads that reading the title is enough.
I am afeared to go look.
I ain’t askeared.
The problem isn't homosexuals or pronouns.
The problem people have with it is that it's obviously and shamelessly pander-monium. The designers admit it serves NO purpose whatsoever to either the game mechanics or the story's plot.
Meaning it's throwaway. Its only function is to signal a virtue that is meant to exist outside the game.
P.S., “Some believe in freedom & democracy while others focus on strength and security.” Democracy = mob rule by forcing consensus on all. You have the “freedom” to conform or leave. This creates a constant political struggle to get the consensus on your side, or to convince the majority you rep them. It’s not a secure way to live for the minority. And violence is NOT strength, e.g., it’s the tactic of those with a weak or nonexistent argument, when served by those who exist by “The Most Dangerous Superstition” – Larken Rose.
"Conform or leave" always exists in societies. The problem with majoritarian democracies is how the common ground rules are established and what domains they operate over.
The answer to this conundrum isn't some magical different form of government, it is many different governments and many different jurisdictions; roughly: panarchy and subsidiarity.
State power is not looking very fragile these days.
from where I'm sitting this state power doesn't look so fragile.
IOW a totally hypothetical proposition - very appropriate for a computer game which is a hypothetical reality.
"The series' most recent installment, 2011's Skyrim, allows players to participate in an epic war between two sides: rural Nords who want to practice their religion in peace (but who happen to be racist against elves), and urban, educated elves who advocate for a diverse, cosmopolitan society (but who want to use state power to squelch the Nordic religion). Could that possibly be a metaphor?"
Opinion instantly disregarded. Seriously though, Pete, you can just admit you've never played Skyrim rather than trying and completely failing to summarize the central conflict. We'll think less of you, but it won't tank your credibility. And no, it couldn't possibly be a metaphor, because you're mischaracterizing one side, and just plain wrong about the other.
Undoubtedly, it is possible because there is an open opportunity for everyone there. In fact, it's good that you are thinking about this kind of pastime. In addition, I can safely say that you can find something convenient in 1win.ca where you can read a review about various applications. So if you also have the same desire to learn, visit this reliable website and try to include it.