Hmm? I suppose you *could* play by remaining around the core worlds, but you absolutely don't need to, and you're missing out on much of the game if you do, so I'm not sure I see where you're coming from.
First, I need to go to the core worlds to get missions that point me to where useful things are outside of the core worlds.
I actually do have a tendency to wander out into the outer part of the map, and it's pretty grim. It's how I know paying attention to open hyperspace is pointless. Seriously, run the calculations some time. Is it more efficient to travel around a place of dense storms or to plow through it at safe speeds? As it stands, the straight line is the best option, because all player paths are straight lines from bases of supply.
There are a great many systems that do not have anything at all in them, and evaluating these systems has a consequential cost. Before the resource efficiency skills come into play, a player may only have enough space to carry the fuel and supplies to get to an exploration mission at the edge of the map without much in the way of extra stops.
You said in a previous thread that placing outposts in the distant part of the map makes them too civilized, but directing the player to places of good salvage through missions isn't substantially different. Even pirate and Pather bases provide convenient resupply, through trade or raid, but it's all directed through objectives generated by the game. The truly, "wild," parts of the game are empty and unprofitable to the player.
My suggestion would be to redistribute the core worlds around the map and rework hyperspace so that they are the places with easiest access. It makes the outer wilds genuinely wild, especially with something like slipstreams that might connect you to places you wouldn't otherwise want to go.
Plus, making the outer wilds a matter of difficult navigation rather than raw distance is just fun.