It's the only one I was going to go with anyhow.PC is the only option then
Yes it literally does because it means it’s too advanced to run at 60. Thanks for proving my point.Yeah 30 fps screams nextgen ... really really loud
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.
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.
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.
If you didnt get the steam version, i would have fed you to cthulhu.It's the only one I was going to go with anyhow.
FTFYSkyrim on Xbox supported some mods. Not even the best ones.
Watch the show again this time around.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.
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.If you didnt get the steam version, i would have fed you to cthulhu.
Rdr2 had a much larger dev team. I think 1600. Bethesda is in the 4 to 500 range I believe.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.
Good point. PC is the best way to go for Bethesda Bryo engine RPGs. Always has been.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.
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.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
My sentiments exactly as someone who paid quite a bit for a similarly capable PC monitor.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.
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.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.
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.
What do PCs have to do with anything?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.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.Anyone expected otherwise? This game is pushing the hardware and it is almost 3 years old now.
It's not gonna be 1440p or native 4K anyway.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.
They need 4-6x less pixels to achieve double FPS?.... is anyone surprised? I mean, look at that game.
Honestly, they better add a 1440p/900p performance mode for Series X/S respectively.
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.
Watch the show again this time around.
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.
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.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.
if you think that the game we saw last night is the same complexity as RDR2 then you are probably on Meth.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.
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.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.
if you think that the game we saw last night is the same complexity as RDR2 then you are probably on Meth.
There was one clip with text at the bottom saying "Series X quality mode" So I fingers crossed there's another mode.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.
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.It's just No Man's Sky, is another take I saw quoted elsewhere.
Like Redfall?Yes it literally does because it means it’s too advanced to run at 60. Thanks for proving my point.
Its the best way.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.
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.