I'm Glad Starfield Got Delayed

Yes, I said it. I'm glad Starfield got delayed, and I'm not embarrassed about it.

A couple of days ago, when Starfield received its official delay, I didn't think twice about it; I was glad to see that the company was taking the time to do stuff. Even if I was disappointed by a release I was actively looking forward to and I was sad to see the tradition of 11/11 being broken, I was happy to see that the company had the bravery to come forward and admit that Starfield would have been unplayable. Alas, despite my disappointments, I moved on and carried on; I was glad to see that at least the title would be receiving extra care and love, as many titles need nowadays.

In fact, I truly believed that this was a commonality, as I figured that numerous members of the community would side with what I presumed was a silent agreement: if games need a delay, they should receive them. It wasn't until I was browsing through Twitter that I found I was predominantly alone in this standing, as my fellow gamers around the world seemed outraged at Phil Spencer for the decision. Flummoxed by this, I decided I'd dig a little deeper in search of whether I felt I was right about feeling the way I did, or if perhaps other players were in the right, and I was blinded by a misguided trust.

The general discourse is surrounded by an ideology that Xbox Studios as a whole is being led by incapable management, as the userbase of Twitter took the opportunity to question Phil Spencer and his choices. As a reciprocation, other gamers stood in defence of his actions, stating that despite the lack of first-party titles released to Xbox this year, Phil Spencer was in the right. 

To those criticizing Phil Spencer for the Starfield & Redfall delays, please consider:

1. Can YOU lead & manage 1 of the biggest brands in the world with hundreds of staff & moving pieces?
2. The pandemic has affected EVERYONE
3. Slow & steady wins the race
4. He's only human

— MissDeusGeek (@MissDeusGeek) May 15, 2022

Truth be told, I didn't need to delve too deep into social media to find which side I stood on. Although I understand the frustration of other Xbox fans that won't have a first-party release throughout 2022, I can't sympathise with the ideology of forcing a game out of development for the sake of having a game out in the year. Quantity for the sake of quantity ceases to be quality, and I believe that Phil Spencer has the right idea.

Despite all of this, however, Phil Spencer went public and made a statement on Twitter as well, stating that he "fully supports giving teams time to release" great games when they're ready, and that delivery of consistently high-quality products is expected, saying that "we will continue to work to better meet those expectations".

These decisions are hard on teams making the games & our fans. While I fully support giving teams time to release these great games when they are ready, we hear the feedback. Delivering quality & consistency is expected, we will continue to work to better meet those expectations. https://t.co/mIfXGd3rui

— Phil Spencer (@XboxP3) May 12, 2022

Perhaps what's most frustrating about the situation is that I don't want another Cyberpunk 2077, but seemingly half of the community hasn't learnt their lesson, and Starfield proved that. As unfortunate as it may be, it seems like no company can ever do right. If a game gets no release date and tries to be honest about the unrealistic expectations of setting one before time, it gets condemned for being a hype machine with no real backbone, such as Hytale. If a game gets announced for a specific date and gets delayed for quality reasons, it gets condemned because we demand studios keep their word, throwing quality out the window, such as Starfield. If a game promises to meet a specific release date and finds that to be unrealistic later down the line (seeing that videogame development is incredibly complex), crunching employees to meet that deadline to not get condemned for delaying, we condemn them for inhumane actions. Seemingly, studios have no right answer. Although I'm not defending crunching in the industry, I come to question if it's even done out of malice, or sheer fear of repercussions.

So that's it, I'm right, everyone's wrong, and Phil Spencer is perfect? Not quite, either. I understand the woe of no first-party release — especially after the videogame drought due to the pandemic — for Xbox, but outrage isn't going to solve this: patience will. I fear that coming down on Phil Spencer, Xbox Studios, and Bethesda will not teach the right lessons, but rather encourage fear of the mob mentality that many studios suffer at the hands of. I fear that this outrage will only teach studios to be less forthcoming about their struggles, and thus encourage the crunch mentality we've been fighting for what feels like forever.

I don't want to see Starfield suffer rushed development and see the light of day in the state Cyberpunk 2077 did, and I don't want to see what is a passion project to many fall apart because of unrealistic expectations. At the end of the day, the only thing I want is to see Starfield be the title it can be, not what it once was meant to be.

I understand that it is far more likely for people to speak out against things they feel negative towards — it feels weird to say “glad Starfield got delayed” without prompt — but I genuinely do wish that the community feedback hadn’t been a backlash. I’m happy to see that others came forward and defended the delay, but a part of me can’t help but feel dejected that it had to be defended in the first place.