It's been two months since Starfield released, and players are starting to take notice of the RPG's surprisingly PG-13 approach to a galaxy reeling from a destructive war - especially in light of its Mature rating.
Starfield was awarded an M rating by the US rating service, the ESRB. Traditionally, that rating may denote "intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language." Similarly, it sports an 18 rating from the UK's PEGI board, which denotes a "level of violence [that] reaches a stage where it becomes a depiction of gross violence," as well as "the glamorization of the use of illegal drugs and of the simulation of gambling."
Technically, Starfield hits many of those criteria. It's a violent game in which much of your interaction with the world comes via the barrel of a gun. It might lack the full-fledged gore of Fallout, but Bethesda's use of the environmental blood-splatter is definitely here. PEGI specifically denotes the "motiveless" killing of innocent civilians as a reason for its 18 rating. There's no gambling, but there is an entire planet dedicated to the production, consumption, and, in some cases, theft of an illegal drug. These rating categories exist for a reason, and Starfield nestles firmly within them.
Nevertheless, there seems to be a large subsection of the community somewhat stumped by Starfield's sanitized take on the galaxy. In recent weeks, two players have taken to the game's subreddit to query the PG-13 nature of this M-rated RPG. In one post, a player asked "What's wrong with Bethesda and their take on nudity in an M-rated game?", asking "am I the only one who finds it weird that I can't even kiss my romancing option?"
Given the prevalence of violence throughout the game, the poster argues that Starfield's limited romance is bizarre in comparison to the rest of the game - "I just can't get behind the mindset that drove Bethesda to drive this aspect of romantic relationships completely out of their games, while keeping the M rating because of the violence."
Enter the underbelly
But even that violence appears to have been toned down in comparison to other games. Skyrim features plenty of blood and dismemberment, and that aforementioned post also notes Fallout's "exploding heads" and "crippling shots." That kind of gore is missing from Starfield, and it's not the only aspect of a 'realistic' galaxy that's thought to be missing. Nudity and dedicated romance issues are part of the community shopping list, but another thread notes other factors - the lack of "morally bad crime" like "slavery, prostitution, or intersystem drug problems" is held up as a missing piece, much like the intergalactic bars, which don't hold up in the face of games like Mass Effect. User camelCaseSpace points towards BioWare's Afterlife bar, which, while limited by technical limitations, featured "gangs, dancers, fights, someone spiking drinks."
One of the most interesting discussions circles around the intergalactic war that forms the backdrop of much of Starfield's story and its relative absence from the world. The Colony War is described as "a bloody conflict," but little evidence of it survives, even in the minds of the civilians and soldiers who lived through it. There's little substantial military presence and even less regarding the kind of border and faction tensions that defined games like Fallout and Skyrim.
It's an interesting issue to unpick. I'm struck by one comment that notes that "it feels like [Bethesda was] hoping for a T rating, but the inclusion of drugs pushed it over the edge of rating boards." That's clearly not entirely the case - PEGI, at the very least, makes more of the violence than the drugs, and Bethesda's Fallout games have featured substantial drug use. But whether it's the result of Starfield's NASA-punk aesthetic or a surprising new Puritan streak at the studio, it's clear that some of the Starfield community was hoping for a universe with a little more bite.
Just in case, here's our Starfield romances guide.
