Is Starfield tracking player decisions?
Indeed, Starfield does monitor player decisions, but their influence on the narrative of the game is not often very great. For instance, the game lets you decide which of the UC or the Crimson Fleet to support, but this decision has not much effect. The UC won't punish you much even if you support the Crimson Fleet, thus it will still provide you promotions.
Why is it annoying when decisions have no repercussions?
This lack of consequences irritates me since it indicates that Bethesda has the capacity to make decisions that matter but decides against it. Bethesda is more concerned in providing players with access to all the game has to offer than in making sure decisions significantly affect the storyline.
How does the story of the game change in absence of consequences?
It compromises the story and makes players believe their decisions have no influence. This is particularly aggravating as player decisions seemed to have little bearing on the ending of Mass Effect 3, which players complained about.
Does this indicate that decisions made in Starfield have absolutely no value?
Not perfectly. Your decisions affect some little differences in conversation, but they have no appreciable effect on the plot.
Does Starfield provide any justification for this dearth of consequences?
No, there is no in-universe reason for this absence of consequences. Simply said, Bethesda decided to do this.
This implies that the narrative of the game will let down players.
Not always. Starfield features interesting stories and exciting mechanisms even if this lack of consequence could be annoying. The narrative of the game is nevertheless fun even if player decisions have less influence than some might wish.
