Support NeoGAF

[ProtoByte]

I don't think this is surprising or w big deal. Framerate is gonna be the least of this game's problems.

 

[DeepEnigma]

PC is the only option then

It's the only one I was going to go with anyhow.

 

[arkhamguy123]

Yeah 30 fps screams nextgen ... really really loud

Yes it literally does because it means it’s too advanced to run at 60. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

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.

Okay but the only "pushing of boundaries" you are referring to is in breadth of content. That does not say anything about the depth or complexity of the content, or the level of interactivity with it.

The things of depth and interactivity the Direct focused on, are not things without peer in other open-world games. Starfield might just have more of that in absolute number, but that's a poor metric to use to say "this is true next-gen", IMO.

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.

Maybe the engine sucks due to being too cluttered, but if that's the case Bethesda should've worked harder to iron out those problems years ago.

The price to be paid seems to be the game not offering a 60 FPS option, but even lacking a 40 FPS option on consoles sucks too. At least there they could've used VRR to fake out smoother 60 or even 120 refresh support.

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.

I watched the entire Showcase and Direct and, again, I haven't said anything bad about the game. It was one of the highlights and they had a lot of good stuff shown off. Some of my concerns from the 2022 footage and mentions are no longer a thing, either, so that's great.

I'm just not 100% on the idea it's the "first real next-gen game" as some people are putting it, or that it's the only game offering massive scale for an open-world game. Partly because "scale" is subjective.

 

[feynoob]

It's the only one I was going to go with anyhow.

If you didnt get the steam version, i would have fed you to cthulhu.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Skyrim on Xbox supported some mods. Not even the best ones.

FTFY

 

[feynoob]

Okay but the only "pushing of boundaries" you are referring to is in breadth of content. That does not say anything about the depth or complexity of the content, or the level of interactivity with it.

The things of depth and interactivity the Direct focused on, are not things without peer in other open-world games. Starfield might just have more of that in absolute number, but that's a poor metric to use to say "this is true next-gen", IMO.

Watch the show again this time around.

 

[DeepEnigma]

If you didnt get the steam version, i would have fed you to cthulhu.

Ofc it would be on Steam. Not going to SubPass a game like this. Waste of money. Buy it, folks. The mod community is the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[wolffy66]

You can make whatever arguments u want for or against this....

But everyone knew they were gonna be 30 fps, like every other Bethesda game.

 

[Corndog]

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.

Rdr2 had a much larger dev team. I think 1600. Bethesda is in the 4 to 500 range I believe.

 

[DeepEnigma]

You can make whatever arguments u want for or against this....

But everyone knew they were gonna be 30 fps, like every other Bethesda game.

Good point. PC is the best way to go for Bethesda Bryo engine RPGs. Always has been.

 

[gothmog]

I don't need 4k/60, but the capabilities of the Series X had me buying a TV with VRR and 120hz gaming modes. And now you're just telling me to deal with 30fps? No performance modes? No VRR 40fps target? People should be howling at Xbox about this.

 

[IDappa]

Did any gameplay that involved shooting in the deep dive look slow? If so, Im afraid you may have to go to a hospital because Im worried your havn a fuckn stroke

That's not what you said though?. Just pointing out that just because a game is first person doesn't mean that ties it to a certain pace.

Being a shooter RPG, that leans heavily into its RPG side I will safely say that it is a slower shooter than the popular twitch shooters of the current days.

Did someone hurt you as a child or something?. No need for the aggression. I'm not even the same dude you were talking to lol.

 

[Nydius]

I don't need 4k/60, but the capabilities of the Series X had me buying a TV with VRR and 120hz gaming modes. And now you're just telling me to deal with 30fps? No performance modes? No VRR 40fps target? People should be howling at Xbox about this.

My sentiments exactly as someone who paid quite a bit for a similarly capable PC monitor.

Of course, I think we should be howling at both Sony and Microsoft because neither of them are ever going to live up to the expectations they set for their top end consoles and then they'll probably try to sell us on mid-gen refreshes that supposedly will do what these ones were originally marketed to do.

 

[Bojji]

If there is no 40fps option (I'm playing burning shores tight now and it works great) on series x I'm getting it on pc. Fuck 30fps.

 

[Deerock71]

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.

Your standards have changed over time. I'm still happy with a LOCKED 30, and can deal with a wavering 30. Expecting consoles to keep up with PCs was always a fool's paradise.

 

[DaGwaphics]

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.

It's true that we don't know if the 1440p is natural or with FSR or similar. The graphics will probably be comparable with only slight downgrades on XSS since the X is at 4k. Many games do get to 1440 on the XSS when the X is riding at 4k (though not all, obviously).

 

[GenericUser]

I really did not expect it to hit 4K on the series x. I hope if holds the 30fps consistently throughout the game.

 

[Rykan]

Your standards have changed over time. I'm still happy with a LOCKED 30, and can deal with a wavering 30. Expecting consoles to keep up with PCs was always a fool's paradise.

What do PCs have to do with anything?

 

[LaughingStock]

It's a gamepass day one, play anywhere title, right?
I don't mind it being 30 fps as long as it's stable 30 fps.

 

[DeepEnigma]

If there is no 40fps option (I'm playing burning shores tight now and it works great) on series x I'm getting it on pc. Fuck 30fps.

I'd be shocked of they can get 40fps on the technical side of things. Seems like more proficient legwork (technically) than even a 60fps standard option.

 

[Bojji]

I'd be shocked of they can get 40fps on the technical side of things. Seems like more proficient legwork (technically) than even a 60fps standard option.

Most 30 fps games are running around 40fps and above, they lock to 30 because before 120hz displays there was no other option. They can add dynamic res and lower some settings, there is no way in hell it isn't scalable like this to run at least 40 on series x.

 

[DaGwaphics]

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's engine has different capabilities than Rockstar's . I doubt you can drop a wrench on the other side of the map and come back for it later in RDR2, it's those kind of things that make Bethesda Bethesda, but it leads to some heaviness. We are talking multiple cities and star cruise ships and ports and all that now, the scope here really can't be compared to anything else.

 

[NeonGhost]

We all know it’s a shit game engine always was always will be

 

[FoxMcChief]

I’m perfectly happy with 4k@30fps.

Can’t fucking wait!

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

Your standards have changed over time. I'm still happy with a LOCKED 30, and can deal with a wavering 30. Expecting consoles to keep up with PCs was always a fool's paradise.

This has nothing to do with keeping up with PCs. If that was the case most games wouldn’t have 60fps options even on the Xbox consoles. It’s about providing options. I don’t care if your okay with 30fps, some people are fine with that but they need to give more options. The standard this gen is more option in framerates for console gamers in how they want to enjoy their games. Having only a 30fps option in 2023 is unacceptable IMO and the opinion of a lot of people. Being surprised that people have improved standards over time is silly.

 

[Esppiral]

Anyone expected otherwise? This game is pushing the hardware and it is almost 3 years old now.

 

[night13x]

Lol and this is how it started with redfall too.

4090 + 7800x3D + 64gb ram. If this doesnt run at LEAST 60 fps 4k (preferably 120 fps) with these specs on PC, then its the devs who cannot optimize their games correctly. Hope for the best.

Hopefully they will reconsider and do a 1440p 60fps for the X.

 

[mysticboy]

This is ridiculous.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Anyone expected otherwise? This game is pushing the hardware and it is almost 3 years old now.

Bethesda games on consoles always max out at 30 fps. At best you get 60 fps boost modes when a new console comes out and a gamer plays the game in backwards compat.

Since they never said anything about 60 fps, it was pretty much a guarantee to be 30 fps, with the hope a 60 fps low res mode would be available. Guess not.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Hopefully a 1080p/1440p 40fps option for S and X. Always felt 1440p was such a stupid resolution target for the S and a waste of limited resources.

It's not gonna be 1440p or native 4K anyway.

It'll be exactly like the majority of first- and third-party games we have got so far. Advertised as 4K, but they hardly ever hit that resolution.

I can bet my left nut that it won't be native 4K or 1440p on X and S, respectively. The average res will be lower than that; there may even be upscaling techs involved.

 

[Tsaki]

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

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

They need 4-6x less pixels to achieve double FPS?

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

My sentiments exactly as someone who paid quite a bit for a similarly capable PC monitor.

Of course, I think we should be howling at both Sony and Microsoft because neither of them are ever going to live up to the expectations they set for their top end consoles and then they'll probably try to sell us on mid-gen refreshes that supposedly will do what these ones were originally marketed to do.

FWIW Sony have delivered on 40, 60 and even 120 FPS options in most of their 1P AAA games this gen as options. Spiderman 2 will be the same in that regard.

I feel Starfield should at least provide an option for 40 FPS, if not 60. There's no real reason why it has to only have a 30 FPS option unless, as I've been thinking, Series S may be a factor.

Watch the show again this time around.

This is definitely one way to cope I guess.

Most 30 fps games are running around 40fps and above, they lock to 30 because before 120hz displays there was no other option. They can add dynamic res and lower some settings, there is no way in hell it isn't scalable like this to run at least 40 on series x.

Yeah there has to be an option at least for Series X.

But I think they are going with 30 because that's the easiest solution for Series S without adding a lot to technical optimizations. So they use the extra headroom on the X for higher native resolution.

 

[MarkMe2525]

There seems to be a lot of people upset that Starfield looked so good today. This looks like it has the potential to be one for the ages, and people are throwing shade for a 30 fps cap?

Not once when playing ToTK, God of War, or TLoU did I feel hampered nor care about the frame rate. Yes 60 fps is great, but it is not a necessity.

 

[semiconscious]

i played & enjoyed cyberpunk 2077 on my ps4. i'll be playing & enjoying starfield on my series s. there's just no hope for people like myself...

 

[Rykan]

This has nothing to do with keeping up with PCs. If that was the case most games wouldn’t have 60fps options even on the Xbox consoles. It’s about providing options. I don’t care if your okay with 30fps, some people are fine with that but they need to give more options. The standard this gen is more option in framerates for console gamers in how they want to enjoy their games. Having only a 30fps option in 2023 is unacceptable IMO and the opinion of a lot of people. Being surprised that people have improved standards over time is silly.

I agree with this. I don't understand why some people keep insisting 60 FPS is this unachievable technical marvel that is only reserved for super computers. We shouldn't have to deal with frame rate targets straight out of the 90s, when we're all aware of how suboptimal they are.

 

[Boy bawang]

If they don't offer a performance mode, I'm gonna guess that the bottleneck isn't on the GPU and resolution side.

 

[salva]

Sucks they don't have a 1440p 60fps option on the X.
But all good, as long as the game is good 30fps is fine. I can jump between Xbox on my home theatre and PC with my 3070ti anyway.

 

[L*][*N*K]

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.

if you think that the game we saw last night is the same complexity as RDR2 then you are probably on Meth.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

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.

I think it probably means that Bethesda have received a lot of support from Xbox engineers to get this running well. This game needs to do well, and everyone knows it.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

if you think that the game we saw last night is the same complexity as RDR2 then you are probably on Meth.

It's just No Man's Sky, is another take I saw quoted elsewhere.

 

[Represent.]

Best news of the fucking year.

All the framerate warriors will realize 30fps is fine. And if not they’ll buy a PC.

Enough of this 60 for everything. Devs have finally smartened up

 

[Bogroll]

I don't need 4k/60, but the capabilities of the Series X had me buying a TV with VRR and 120hz gaming modes. And now you're just telling me to deal with 30fps? No performance modes? No VRR 40fps target? People should be howling at Xbox about this.

There was one clip with text at the bottom saying "Series X quality mode" So I fingers crossed there's another mode.

 

[Zug]

Disapointed by the lack of 24 fps "cinematic" experience.

 

[L*][*N*K]

It's just No Man's Sky, is another take I saw quoted elsewhere.

It's just bitter fanboys being bitter about Microsoft not being the burning ship they were making it to be a month ago, if Starfield delivers and the ABK deal actually moves forward you will see an army of deranged lunatics this Fall.

 

[Rac3r]

Yes it literally does because it means it’s too advanced to run at 60. Thanks for proving my point.

Like Redfall?

 

[fermcr]

Zelda is 30fps and everyone was fine with it.
Some people always seem to be bitching about something...

 

[balls of snow]

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.

Its the best way.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

It's just bitter fanboys being bitter about Microsoft not being the burning ship they were making it to be a month ago, if Starfield delivers and the ABK deal actually moves forward you will see an army of deranged lunatics this Fall.

I don't care about COD being owned by Microsoft at all, I don't play it much (haven't even finished the latest campaign) and as I've said at least once on here, Activision Blizzard games would not be something I'd be excited about getting on Gamepass. I literally do not care if the deal goes through.

With that said, I am interested to see which game people pivot to and say has always been their favourite FPS and that they'll be playing Day1 if COD becomes an Xbox franchise.

 

[mansoor1980]

any star citizen players in here? how does that look compared to starfield?