Starfield performance and everything else thread

[Veseleil]

Feel free to discuss the most interesting feature of this game: the most terrible performance vs. visual gains in a decade or so. Everything else included!

Here you can whine about your perfectly decent PC not being able to run stable 60fps in 1080p in the year 2023 all day long! It's a game with exclusive 1st person view, and no FOV slider from the factory!

You guessed it right, it's a mock the flop out of a dud kinda thread. Enjoy!

 

[i486]

Has anyone here tried the game on a Sandy Bridge - Kaby Lake era i7? How bad is it?

Despite all the negative discussion about the game I'm still excited to try it out. It's probably going to be like New Vegas on the PS3, but hey, people still loved that game.

 

[Space Lynx]

its only been bad for me in New Atlantic, I changed a couple more settings, put shadows to low and contact shadows to low, everyhting else medium, fsr2 and 90% render resolution, i most get around 130-150 fps, but new atlantis knee caps me down to about 85-95 range.

honestly still looks great to me, pretty happy with it. having a lot of... the hours keep passing and I am like wth i missed lunch (3 hours ago) lmao

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Honestly this game is just going through the normal AAA rounds online that every AAA game faces these days.... It looks bad, the performance is trash, cue random screenshots from the worst part of the game rinse repeat when the next AAA game releases....

You heard the same stuff about CP2077 a game that looks substantially better but launched in a rougher state.... Although it seems BGIII and Elden Ring got a pass because they are generally better games they still perform like crap on high end hardware in spots and don't particularly look very good.


Anyone who expected the performance to be all that different after playing FO4 was just setting themselves up for disappointment honestly.

 

[Veseleil]

So...
First thing that hurts my eyes (whenever I see any gameplay videos or photos - I'm away from home for another 3 days) are totally off looking NPCs. Damn, some androids look more alive.

Terrible walking animations, facial expressions as well. Colours are washed out (please don't about how that's artistic choice), everything is heavily tinted/filtered. Black levels don't need any comment, at least for a normal person with working eyes.

I'll stop here to respond to and greet a first comment person!

Has anyone here tried the game on a Sandy Bridge - Kaby Lake era i7? How bad is it?

Despite all the negative discussion about the game I'm still excited to try it out. It's probably going to be like New Vegas on the PS3, but hey, people still loved that game.

I'll probably try to run it on my spare/guest PC (2nd specced one), at least for the science benefits.
Yeah, it will be played massively alright, but remember how heavy even the modded Skyrim could become on a high-end hardware. And this thing is outrageous being vanilla!

its only been bad for me in New Atlantic, I changed a couple more settings, put shadows to low and contact shadows to low, everyhting else medium, fsr2 and 90% render resolution, i most get around 130-150 fps, but new atlantis knee caps me down to about 85-95 range.

honestly still looks great to me, pretty happy with it. having a lot of... the hours keep passing and I am like wth i missed lunch (3 hours ago) lmao

I can't wait to get back home to try it out (and get pissed off right away probably)!

Honestly this game is just going through the normal AAA rounds online that every AAA game faces these days.... It looks bad, the performance is trash, cue random screenshots from the worst part of the game rinse repeat when the next AAA game releases....

You heard the same stuff about CP2077 a game that looks substantially better but launched in a rougher state.... Although it seems BGIII and Elden Ring got a pass because they are generally better games they still perform like crap on high end hardware in spots and don't particularly look very good.


Anyone who expected the performance to be all that different after playing FO4 was just setting themselves up for disappointment honestly.

I could agree on most of the said stuff, except I think the FO4 had much better performance on a medium capable period correct hardware. This one is kind of a shock TBH, considering the current high/higher-end hardware capabilities.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I could agree on most of the said stuff, except I think the FO4 had much better performance on a medium capable period correct hardware. This one is kind of a shock TBH, considering the current high/higher-end hardware capabilities.

I had a 980ti and another system with dual 970s paired with a 6700k and 5820k and it performed like crap on both. I wouldn't say my current system is that far off and I am enjoying the performance in most areas quite a bit more.

Was not really till I jumped to 1080s that performance was any better in FO4





I mostly gamed at 4k but I clearly remember it dropping into the 40s in areas at 1440p.... Not to mention there where so many things broken about the game.

 

[95Viper]

There is already a Starfield discussion thread. Please use that thread for discussions of the game.