Support NeoGAF

[Bernardougf]

Dogshit fps ... luckily I dont like bethesda games

 

[DenchDeckard]

I am not a fan of 30fps games at all...so pc for me...

But acting like cross gen ps4 games are going to come close to the craziness that could randomly happen in this game all with real time global illumination going on etc is bonkers..

Hopefully they manage to lock in a 60fps patch after launch

 

[adamsapple]

Definite improvement over the first one. Volumetric fog?

Better lighting, ground textures, npc, building facades all look better.

 

[MikeM]

This is why I sold my Series X and built a PC.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Expected. 1440p is a surprise on XSS, nice!

I figured this game would probably push the CPU too hard for a consistent 60 throughout. The fact that there was room to drive the pixel counts this high just makes me believe that even more.

Can't wait.

Maybe they will throw in a VRR unlocked mode last minute, something like that might come in handy for the next hardware.

 

[Majima Everywhere System]

Not good enough by a half

 

[Zones]

Did you even watch the showcase? This game is definitely ambitious and feels pretty complex, it's the first game I've seen this gen that actually feels next generation

It’s doesn’t look to be more complex than RDR2, and the open world is not as seamless as RDR2’s.

If RDR2 can be stable 30 FPS on the potato CPU of last gen, then surely Starfield can be 60 on this gen’s significantly more robust CPU.

 

[Sorcerer]

Special paid DLC incoming for 60fps. Or wait for the Special Xbox Series X Pro game of the year re-release edition.

 

[Romulus]

It's a massive open world single player Bethesda game with super high fidelity visuals. Totally fine with 30.


If you want 60, get a high end PC.

You won't need a super high end PC to get 60fps 1440p. 4k is a wasteful resource hog so that fixes the problem. Most people are playing on a sub 32inch monitor anyway, so even less of a worry.

 

[Mr Moose]

As long as it doesn't feel like dog shit to play it at 30fps, it should be fine. I'm looking at you, Witcher 3.
This is good news for PC too with that spec lists today.

 

[bender]

It’s doesn’t look to be more complex than RDR2, and the open world is not as seamless as RDR2’s.

If RDR2 can be stable 30 FPS on the potato CPU of last gen, then surely Starfield can be 60 on this gen’s significantly more robust CPU.

Bethesda just isn't great with tech and they often feel a decade+ behind a lot of other developers in a lot of areas. *cough animation work cough*

 

[Jibran#one]

This is the first game that actually looks like proper next gen game except for the graphics
The scale of the game looks truly next gen and I'm ok with 30 FPS.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

What you wrote down there is pure downplay.

No, not really. Just giving you my perspective.

I advice you reserve your judgment after launch. You can get an idea what this game is about.

I always do that. However, lots of people tend to not do that lots of other certain types of games. And I am not even saying Starfield looks like a bad game; it was one of the highlights!

I'm just not going to stroke it off like it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, either, because that's not true.

Numerous hand crafted and procedural generated planets, a full ship building suite, a full on space sim with combat, traversal to and from ships, including being able to invade enemy ships mid combat, structure building mechanics on the planets etc etc.

All of that you mentioned in terms of the the planets is just wealth of content, but that doesn't mean there is much of substance to do on those planets. 90% of the planets in the game exist for optional resources, that's it. You can visit them, but it doesn't mean there will be much to do on them. From what we've seen so far, you can mine materials from planets, analyze their atmospheres and survey them by observing the wildlife. Starfield is not the only open-world game where you can do these things, it's just one of the few to put an emphasis on them as things to actually be done by the player. There is a difference.

Some of the other things like invading enemy ships, building out your spaceship etc. are cool but again aren't too functionally dissimilar from things in other open-world games. Maybe other open-world games place that level of depth and focus on customizing your player build for different types of combat, but they do have equivalents.

This is not just a big slab of square land mass that you traverse from east to west only.

Neither are most open-world games

If R5 3600, RTX 2070 can't run this game at 60fps then I guess we can give them benifit of doubt that is game is taxing on the hardware ? But I think the game is just not optimized, they may fix this later down the line as they had to release the game this year. lol

Either that or it's not particularly optimized. It could be like Flight Sim, where powerful CPUs & GPUs had issues running that game at max settings for a while (not sure if it's still the case) only to find out the game was very heavy on single-threaded performance and not optimized well at all for multithreading. I think the same was the case for Plague's Tale: Requiem, too.

So yeah I agree with you that it's probably down to lack of optimizations.

Series S is clearly not the bottleneck if it's running at 1440p at the same framerate. I think you're making up issues that you don't even know exist in the first place.

Saying that they should 'just offload it to compute' is a bizarre statement when you literally don't even know that draw submission is a bottleneck.

So why is there no option for 60 FPS, then? And FWIW if Series S is the limiting factor then it is probably not due to the CPU; I think if CPU is the factor here then it might be due to the game not being optimized for multithreading well, but maybe they can get there before launch.

All I am saying is, the game should have an option for console players to play it in 60 FPS or at least 40 FPS with use of VRR to fake 120. How are some of you okay with lack of play options for these big games you're going to sink your teeth into? And, I personally feel both Series console can do more for this game than simply 30 FPS, that's why I'm surprised so many are making excuses for no 60 FPS support.

 

[mansoor1980]

my new desktop wallpaper

 

[drotahorror]

You would think 1080/60 would be achievable for performance mode as well on series x.

 

[Bernardougf]

Excellent. Anyone in here crying can buy a high end PC.

Bring on my locked 30FPS 4K next Gen experience on my high end TV.

Yeah 30 fps screams nextgen ... really really loud

 

[Mister Wolf]

It’s doesn’t look to be more complex than RDR2, and the open world is not as seamless as RDR2’s.

If RDR2 can be stable 30 FPS on the potato CPU of last gen, then surely Starfield can be 60 on this gen’s significantly more robust CPU.

 

[mansoor1980]

that GI is something else

 

[akaFullmetal]

Disappointing but expected. A little bit of a let down after a 30 fps red fall release.

 

[adamsapple]

All of that you mentioned in terms of the the planets is just wealth of content, but that doesn't mean there is much of substance to do on those planets. 90% of the planets in the game exist for optional resources, that's it. You can visit them, but it doesn't mean there will be much to do on them. From what we've seen so far, you can mine materials from planets, analyze their atmospheres and survey them by observing the wildlife. Starfield is not the only open-world game where you can do these things, it's just one of the few to put an emphasis on them as things to actually be done by the player. There is a difference.

Some of the other things like invading enemy ships, building out your spaceship etc. are cool but again aren't too functionally dissimilar from things in other open-world games. Maybe other open-world games place that level of depth and focus on customizing your player build for different types of combat, but they do have equivalents.

I don't know why you're hand-waving all those things as just "wealth of content". All those are huge aspects combined in a cohesive package. The landing and take off from planets might be a canned animation, but as the video shows, you can see all the explorable planets and moons from the planet you're on, so they are seamless, just the landing and take off is attached to a canned animation.

that GI is something else

Good-ass art.

 

[feynoob]

No, not really. Just giving you my perspective.

Its downplay, because you ignored the parts that makes this game huge.

I always do that. However, lots of people tend to not do that lots of other certain types of games. And I am not even saying Starfield looks like a bad game; it was one of the highlights!

I'm just not going to stroke it off like it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, either, because that's not true.

What they showed is enough to warrant for that. Just like how you feel about your most anticipated games.

 

[NickFire]

Graphics are very pretty. 30 fps only is tough to believe as necessary on X. Im assuming there is a feature parity requirement with S for them not to have a performance mode on X.

 

[feynoob]

Yeah 30 fps screams nextgen ... really really loud

Having the content is better than that.
You can get higher frame in the feature, but you wont get a content like that easily.

I miss the time, when people actually gave a shit about gameplays.

 

[Knightime_X]

But is there a performance mode?
fuck 4k, gimme 60fps
4k is useless if the framerate isn't there to display its beauty.

 

[xBlueStonex]

Can't wait!

 

[Hoddi]

So why is there no option for 60 FPS, then? And FWIW if Series S is the limiting factor then it is probably not due to the CPU; I think if CPU is the factor here then it might be due to the game not being optimized for multithreading well, but maybe they can get there before launch.

All I am saying is, the game should have an option for console players to play it in 60 FPS or at least 40 FPS with use of VRR to fake 120. How are some of you okay with lack of play options for these big games you're going to sink your teeth into? And, I personally feel both Series console can do more for this game than simply 30 FPS, that's why I'm surprised so many are making excuses for no 60 FPS support.

60fps doesn't happen by magic. We still know literally nothing about how the game will perform on PCs.

For all we know, the game could be highly bandwidth bound and have nothing to do with the CPU/GPU. Pretending to have performance explanations at this point is just bizarre.

 

[normalguy09x]

30 fps really? Thats just sad. Welcome back to PS3/xbox 360 era.

 

[teraflops]

.... is anyone surprised? I mean, look at that game.

Honestly, they better add a 1440p/900p performance mode for Series X/S respectively.

People who believe that the Series X/PS5 are actually native 4k 60-120fps machines because it said it on the box. If you take away DRS, temporal upscaling, VRS, and other techniques they are at best 4k 30 native machines with most modern AAA games. That's not an insult, they are still an incredible value at $500. With that being said, I constantly see people who claim that the generation hasn't even started yet and genuinely believe they are capable of things that 4090s do.

 

[Corndog]

I also highly recommend against playing Bethesda games on consoles. When you're inevitably locked out of a quest because of some bug or glitch, you'll thank god you have the console.

Also, mods. Lots of them.

Are we really going to keep trotting this out?

 

[bender]

Its downplay, because you ignored the parts that makes this game huge.

He didn't. Bethesda can only create so much content for their games and let's not get it twisted, that's a lot but I wouldn't expect the curated content to be much bigger than their previous efforts. To make the scope of this game wider, they are going to rely on procedural generation of planets and an evolution of their radiant quest system. How engaging that is remains to be seen and is totally subjective (some people really love NMS).

 

[NeonGhost]

Are we really going to keep trotting this out?

Maybe they should learn to shut their mouth if they can’t deliver

 

[Mister Wolf]

30 fps really? Thats just sad. Welcome back to PS3/xbox 360 era.

Don't you mean the PS4/Xbox1 era? Since when were large scale games like The Witcher 3, Fallout 4, or Assassin's Creed games 60fps on those consoles?

 

[Bernardougf]

If you owned a PS2, Xbox, Gamecube, PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, Vita, N64, PS, 3DS, PS4, Xbox One...IT NEVER FUCKING MATTERED.

And 3d didnt matter until it did... and hd games didnt matter runtil it did.. and fast load times didnt matter until it did ... 60 fps is a normal evolution for a lot of people ... if you and many others dont mind and preferer the pretty lights thats ok .. but trying to dismiss it as something of little importance is ridiculous

 

[NeonGhost]

Don't you mean the PS4/Xbox1 era? Since when were large scale games like The Witcher 3, Fallout 4, or Assassin's Creed games 60fps on those consoles?

So are you saying we shouldn’t change the standards anymore

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

If you owned a PS2, Xbox, Gamecube, PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, Vita, N64, PS, 3DS, PS4, Xbox One...IT NEVER FUCKING MATTERED.

By that logic we should all still be playing on out NES consoles and Ataris in 2023.

Technology and standards change over time.

Expecting people to be completely okay with 30fps in high-end consoles in 2023 is silly to me.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I don't know why you're hand-waving all those things as just "wealth of content". All those are huge aspects combined in a cohesive package. The landing and take off from planets might be a canned animation, but as the video shows, you can see all the explorable planets and moons from the planet you're on, so they are seamless, just the landing and take off is attached to a canned animation.

So then it is literally not seamless then . Again, you can't just travel from the planet you're currently on, to a new one, without going through a stock entry/exit sequence to and from a planet's atmosphere. Having no player agency in those parts takes away some of the immersion, I think we can both agree on this.

Also it hasn't been confirmed if you can use warp drives to seamlessly travel to other planets at the blink of an eye (like a sort of fast travel but where the "loading" is just the warp drive itself from where you're at into the atmosphere of the new planet). So that's another point against the "game is seamless" argument IMO.

Its downplay, because you ignored the parts that makes this game huge.

I thought we were talking about what made this seem like the first "truly next-gen game"? Or at least, that is what I've seen some others ITT mention. The game having a lot of content does not inherently mean it's more "next-gen" than smaller games with less content.

If the depth in which I can interact with that content is similar to what last-gen games provided, just that I can do more of it in terms of things to have that depth of interaction with, then I don't think that makes for a good case to say it's a "truly next-gen game" compared to other releases thus far.

What they showed is enough to warrant for that. Just like how you feel about your most anticipated games.

But I wouldn't call my most anticipated games the greatest games of all time, either. That's impossible to say for new games because of recency bias.

60fps doesn't happen by magic. We still know literally nothing about how the game will perform on PCs.

For all we know, the game could be highly bandwidth bound and have nothing to do with the CPU/GPU. Pretending to have performance explanations at this point is just bizarre.

Even if it's not related to the CPU or GPU, I don't think the eventual reason for no 60 FPS (or even 40 FPS) options has to necessarily be acceptable.

And from what it seems some are saying, the game won't have a hard cap of 30 on PC, if you have a good enough CPU. But this is a game that was being designed for current-gen consoles from its inception alongside PC, so you would hope the devs had the foresight to design mechanics, systems, logic, physics systems etc. to allow for flexibility on framerate options for consoles.

The question IMO is if they were developing the game from the onset for hardware providing Series S-level performance, and I don't think they were, because I doubt Bethesda or any dev were asking for a Series S from Microsoft this gen. That is Microsoft's particular push. So, maybe Bethesda were designing those elements targeting PS5 & Series X technical specifications, but now that they are owned by Microsoft, they have to make this game run well on Series S.

And that might be why we're seeing 30 FPS for both systems. It's just a theory but it seems like a plausible one.

 

[feynoob]

He didn't. Bethesda can only create so much content for their games and let's not get it twisted, that's a lot but I wouldn't expect the curated content to be much bigger than their previous efforts. To make the scope of this game wider, they are going to rely on procedural generation of planets and an evolution of their radiant quest system. How engaging that is remains to be seen and is totally subjective (some people really love NMS).

filling out those planets will take huge amount of task. Dont have an issue with that.
The game has so much to offer from the presentation. That is not an easy feat.

 

[Mister Wolf]

So are you saying we shouldn’t change the standards anymore

I'm saying $500 never stretched far enough to get you 60 on the AAA big budget open world games and it's not gonna start now.

 

[feynoob]

I thought we were talking about what made this seem like the first "truly next-gen game"? Or at least, that is what I've seen some others ITT mention. The game having a lot of content does not inherently mean it's more "next-gen" than smaller games with less content.

If the depth in which I can interact with that content is similar to what last-gen games provided, just that I can do more of it in terms of things to have that depth of interaction with, then I don't think that makes for a good case to say it's a "truly next-gen game" compared to other releases thus far.

We never saw a game that offers this much. This is what a next gen gameshould be. Allow the system to push the boundaries of what your game can do. Not just graphic part, but the content part too.

 

[NeonGhost]

I'm saying $500 never got you 60 on the AAA big budget open world games and it's not gonna start now.

ill Bet you spiderman will have a fps mode

 

[Mister Wolf]

ill Bet you spiderman will have a fps mode

Spiderman looks old.

 

[R6Rider]

We never saw a game that offers this much. This is what a next gen gameshould be. Allow the system to push the boundaries of what your game can do. Not just graphic part, but the content part too.

This doesn't make any sense when dealing with whether something is "next-gen" or not.

 

[NeonGhost]

Spiderman looks old.

those Bethesda faces look old

 

[Bulletbrain]

I wonder what kind of CPU would be able to brute force 60fps on PC. Surely a Ryzen 3600 will barely be enough for a console like 30fps performance. Creation engine is anyway not the best optimised CPU wise, so the performance targets were not entirely unexpected.

 

[Hey Blinkin]

That really sucks but I'm still going to play it. Hopefully we get a 60fps option in the future though.

 

[mansoor1980]

 

[Robb]

Can’t say I’m surprised based on the footage.

 

[feynoob]

This doesn't make any sense when dealing with whether something is "next-gen" or not.

What is a next gen? Isnt it utilizing the new system capabilities?
Having a content that can only be done the new system is the definition of a next gen.

 

[adamsapple]

So then it is literally not seamless then . Again, you can't just travel from the planet you're currently on, to a new one, without going through a stock entry/exit sequence to and from a planet's atmosphere. Having no player agency in those parts takes away some of the immersion, I think we can both agree on this.

Sure it takes away from some immersion but only if that's the one linchpin you're going to hang your hat on lol.

If you haven't yet, watch the presentation. You'll see why there's a lot more people interested in the game now than there were 24 hours ago.

 

[supernova8]

Expected. 1440p is a surprise on XSS, nice!

As an XSS owner I'm also pleasantly surprised about 1440p then again it depends on what they really means.
It could be that it gets nerfed in terms of graphical fidelity, but I'm so used to having to play stuff at 1080p that I'll take it.