Todd Howard: “You may need to upgrade your PC for this game”

  • Ravi@feddit.de
    2·
    9 months ago

    Haven’t played Starfield yet, but comparing a small handrcafted world to a huge procedural generated world is like comparing a single screenshot from a movie to a single realistic painting. It doesn’t mean that Starfield is good, just that it’s not a fair comparison.

  • qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one
    0·
    9 months ago

    I’m enjoying Starfield, but it isn’t perfect by any means. I have to ask though, is the bottom screenshot from an area that is meant to be normally seen by the player? Because if it isn’t, they should be toning down the graphics as part of optimizing performance. I guess it’s not really a valid point either though, because Starfield’s performance is terrible.

    • all-knight-party@kbin.run
      0·
      9 months ago

      You’re correct, you normally are walking around up on top of and past the top of that waterfall. You’re allowed to go down there, but there’s nothing to find or see.

      The performance has markedly improved for me after the first patch, I now only dip below 60 FPS in cities on an RTX 3060, could still be better, though, as that’s with most settings on low.

        • all-knight-party@kbin.run
          0·
          8 months ago

          I’m getting a locked 60 everywhere except the three city planets and only in areas there where combat doesn’t happen, so it’s not impeding my gameplay, but it is noticeable. And I do have some settings above low, just the major ones like shadows and such are on low.

          But my other main gaming platform is the Switch, so I’m quite accepting of low or unstable framerates, or even games that don’t look their best. I can personally accept it since there aren’t any other games that combine the genres this one does, but it’s… not good.

          • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
            0·
            8 months ago

            But my other main gaming platform is the Switch, so I’m quite accepting of low or unstable framerates

            Which is fine, it’s okay to be accepting of lower frame rates when they’re acceptable. Like, if you had a 2060 or maybe a 2070 then fair enough. But you have a 3060 and aren’t even getting a locked 60 across the board when at low settings. A 30 series card shouldn’t be struggling so much when at low settings, period.

            It’s one thing to physically be okay with lower frame rates, and another to overlook an unoptimized game. I can live with lower frame rates too, but this is still unacceptable.

            • all-knight-party@kbin.run
              0·
              8 months ago

              Personally with Bethesda, I’m more upset about Fallout 4. I like that game more than Starfield, but even though it’s older, it runs worse in the city with all the debris, shadows, and NPCs in a dense location. And I fight things there.

              Or Oblivion, where even to this day I can’t fully get rid of the stuttering when loading world chunks, because the damn game bottlenecks itself.

              I think it is unacceptable. I love those other games much more for what they did at the time, and with what they offered to me, I found the technical issues acceptable to get that niche fix. With Starfield, I still like it to an extent, but this’ll be the last time I trust off the bat that Bethesda will back up their flaws with a worthy enough overall package.