-
Hey everyone! sn00zer has created a vote for your Favorite Games of All Time! Voting ends at 4 days, 15 hours, 42 minutes, 31 seconds. Happy voting!
Todd Howard has confirmed that Starfield will run 4K/30fps on Xbox Series X & 1440p/30fps on Xbox Series S
- Thread starter IDontBeatGames
- Start date
So, it will be a standard Bethesda game launch. This is the company that released games with a 4GB RAM limit and 32bit for years after 64bit CPUs were the norm.
Honestly, After playing game for 10 seconds I couldn't tell you what frame rate I was playing at. As long as it's consistent, I don't care.
Hell, I put hundreds of hours into the PS3 version of Skyrim and that struggled to hit 15fps if you saved it too frequently.
Hell, I put hundreds of hours into the PS3 version of Skyrim and that struggled to hit 15fps if you saved it too frequently.
Ehhhh....I only think this is worth saying because O'Dwyer is so familiar with development through his documentary work and writing: He knows better.
Saying "yo, I'm playing on PC" is legit, but the "oof bad look Xbox" might as well be a shit-post for someone tuned into this stuff as he is; This has a totally reasonable technical explanation, and he knows better than most these aren't just magic boxes with infinite power. Which isn't to say "people should bug him about it," but he's mud-slinging and getting reactions from other people mud-slinging.
That sucks, but understandable, game looks really complex and there's only so much you can do in terms of performance. People acting like this is the end of the game and it's gonna suck now are a little weird, considering TotK just came out with 30 fps and everyone and their mother loves it.
"..we want that fidelity, we want all that stuff. We don't want to sacrifice any of it."
Love to hear it. I'd prefer 60fps at a lower resolution, too. But I respect that artistic decision to go for fidelity over performance.
Love to hear it. I'd prefer 60fps at a lower resolution, too. But I respect that artistic decision to go for fidelity over performance.
A low bar ? So i'm playing games since more than 38 years ignoring the 60 fps Graal ?
Seriously sixty is great but 30 fps is far from being unplayable.. The hyperbole :/
The Series X/S and PS5 CPUs actually perform similarly to Zen 1 chips like the 1800x and (Zen+) 2600x despite using the Zen 2 architecture. This is due to the lower clock speed (3.6GHz vs 4.2+ GHz), the severely cut down cache (8mb vs 32mb), and the use of high-latency GDDR6 RAM instead of CPU-centric DDR4.
Average gaming benchmarks using the PS5 CPU that AMD sells as the Ryzen 4700S:
The Ryzen 4700S actually boosts to 4Ghz so it's technically even a bit faster than what the consoles have.
Bethesda probably just can't lock it down to 60fps given the weak CPU and random nature of the game world. They should offer an unlocked option though for people who want it.
I agree. Danny more than anyone I would hope would be more understanding of their decision here given how much he's reported on, made documentaries about, and been embedded with actual teams creating interactive experiences.
It's more about the systems than graphical fidelity. There is no choice between fidelity and performance in this case, because the framerate is limited by the CPU. You're not gaining much performance in that case when lowering the resolution. The choice in this case is interactivity and systems complexity over performance.
Actually, there is. It's called a PC
Edit: Damn it, Phil!
Never expected them to hit stable 60 FPS, but was hoping that at least on XSX hardware there would be a 40 FPS option for VRR displays or 1080p/60FPS
Regardless was always going to play this on PC, their console releases don't tend to be in the best of states comparatively
Regardless was always going to play this on PC, their console releases don't tend to be in the best of states comparatively
Exactly this, people here talking all high and mighty like we're uneducated, but it's a Bethesda game we're talking about, they chose to keep their legacy engine and they can't optimize it for the consoles and now the excuse is the supposed "scope" of the game. Can't wait to see those benchmarks with full CPU load on release!
Plenty of AAA games released in 2011-2013 were 32 bit, including titles like Counter Strike: GO, Darksider 2, Alan Wake, Batman: Arkham City, MW3, Battlefield 3,AC: Revelations, Binary Domain, Crysis 3, Bioshock Infinite and more. The proper transition to 64 bit started after PS4/Xbox One were released.
See above. It was a standard practice back then.
Didn't realise this gen's CPUs were so poor again. Not quite a repeat of Jaguar but not great either in light of what UE5 will be doing etc.The Series X/S and PS5 CPUs actually perform similarly to Zen 1 chips like the 1800x and (Zen+) 2600x despite using the Zen 2 architecture. This is due to the lower clock speed (3.6GHz vs 4.2+ GHz), the severely cut down cache (8mb vs 32mb), and the use of high-latency GDDR6 RAM instead of CPU-centric DDR4.
Average gaming benchmarks using the PS5 CPU that AMD sells as the Ryzen 4700S:
The Ryzen 4700S actually boosts to 4Ghz so it's technically even a bit faster than what the consoles have.
Bethesda probably just can't lock it down to 60fps given the weak CPU and random nature of the game world. They should offer an unlocked option though for people who want it.
When I first got my 140hz monitor and tested it with a game I played a ton, I adjusted fast to preferring very high framerates, especially in fast paced games where fast reactions are a plus. I was quickly very disappointed when games don't have uncapped framerates so I can put it up as high as I can. I'd look all over forums to learn if it's possible to uncap games myself somehow, and you'd be surprised with how many games just lock it for seemingly no reason (like Star Rail, and Genshin Impact).
I seen a lot of people on twitter making fun of this game as if it would run better on their box.
I don't really find 30fps acceptable but at least it's understandable here. I don't ever find 30fps acceptable, but that's also why I don't own any console. And I wouldn't expect this game to run at 60 fps on console.
I am a little worried about optimization on PC though. I will probably need to upgrade to hit 90-144 fps. But usually image quality downgrades are acceptable for me to maintain a higher fps.
I don't really find 30fps acceptable but at least it's understandable here. I don't ever find 30fps acceptable, but that's also why I don't own any console. And I wouldn't expect this game to run at 60 fps on console.
I am a little worried about optimization on PC though. I will probably need to upgrade to hit 90-144 fps. But usually image quality downgrades are acceptable for me to maintain a higher fps.
Need a Venn diagram of folks not touching this at 30 fps while choosing quality mode on FFVI.
Seriously, I would be very happy if Todd can achieve his locked 30 fps on Series X. I am not confident at this point but that's why there are three more months I guess.
Seriously, I would be very happy if Todd can achieve his locked 30 fps on Series X. I am not confident at this point but that's why there are three more months I guess.
I played Oblivion at ~30 on 360, Skyrim at ~30 on 360, PS3, Switch, Fallout 3 on 360 and PS3 at ~30, Fallout New Vegas on 360 at ~30, and Fallout 4 on Xbox One and PS4 at ~30. I'll be perfectly happy playing Starfield at ~30 on Series S.
My biggest surprise is that people actually expected 60 fps from Starfield on console. It's a "next gen" exclusive made by BGS, of course it wasn't going to be 60 on its first release LOL.
My biggest surprise is that people actually expected 60 fps from Starfield on console. It's a "next gen" exclusive made by BGS, of course it wasn't going to be 60 on its first release LOL.
OLED still isn't close to plasmas for motion resolution and I played many many 30 fps games on my Panasonic plasmas back in the day. Don't know what makes OLED special unless we pretend the bar was always set by LEDs.
John from DF has picked up on how a lot of people honestly don't seem to understand engine/simulation bottlenecks vs. normal rendering needs:
View: https://twitter.com/dark1x/status/1668282630352019464
If they're able to convey that more clearly in coverage, the end-result (headaches aside) could help a lot of people understand the creation side of the hobby better.
View: https://twitter.com/dark1x/status/1668282630352019464
If they're able to convey that more clearly in coverage, the end-result (headaches aside) could help a lot of people understand the creation side of the hobby better.
Hopefully Microsoft makes them switch to UE5 for the next game. Time to retire their current engine.
not true, even back in 2021
citation: mr blurbusters himself (first google result but i've seen him and many others discuss it in depth)
It's a shame that plasma tech is dead - Blur Busters Forums
forums.blurbusters.com
It's why I never take the hand-wringing on FPS here seriously.
Glad that Pioneer Plasmas finally get beat. It is a tv from 2009.
yeah oleds are competing with CRTs now for motion clarity, and with BFI, getting closer than we've ever been
I don't know what the solution is that also, because the way these platforms are marketed or set out initially are that you will be able to get the highest level of performance . That aspect changes over time, but given the pandemic came in-between and the belated releases at times of these titles the expectations are still set in (at least that's my perception).
Giving a peek behind the curtain or argumentation as to why it's tough to achieve a higher FPS, may also in a way give fuel for those that say; Do more optimization , as they're outlining what bottlenecks are experienced.
Perhaps it's better to outright say the target you're trying to achieve and maybe even set the expectation lower to mitigate the discussion/negative discourse leading up to the launch. Of course, for titles which are very early in development this is not possible, moreover for titles which are announced at launch the expectation is to achieve or to go a lot further than the previous generation; aka the generational jump.
Perhaps it would help, at least for microsoft, to be more transparent about what they perceive the Xbox platform to be; aka the most head-ache free way to experience game pass titles at two different fidelities. Idk or something like that, don't think it's DF's responsibility to for example change that perspective, but devs themselves are scared for any backlash that may come when they're transparent.
I mean based on FF16 demo, seems that game is struggling to hit 60 on performance mode, dipping into the 40s often. It's obviously not one console over the other. Like John says it really comes down to engine, and ultimately the scope of what the devs are trying to do with it
The funniest thing in that is the guy thinking HFW is a complex game because of machines walking around. Things like this are why I have muted most gaming stuff on twitter
Dumping a game of similar scope and systems onto UE5 isn't going to magically make it 4k60.
I would think if the Series X can hit 4k Native and solid 30fps, it should be able to do 1440p/40fps. However with that said, all the simulation and systems they have running, it could just be CPU bound and dropping resolution would not gain that much for FPS.
Is there a big age disparity between the people who don't mind 30 fps and the people who are "urghh unplayable"?
I know technology has improved but I'm 38. I had an N64. I played through hundreds of games at 30 so.. I don't really care? If there's an option then I'll choose 60 as long as I'm not giving up to much for it but if something is locked at 30 then so be it.
Or is it more a Era thing than an age one?
I feel like if I asked most of my gamer work colleagues if they knew what FPS the game they were currently playing ran at, they wouldn't have a clue.
I know technology has improved but I'm 38. I had an N64. I played through hundreds of games at 30 so.. I don't really care? If there's an option then I'll choose 60 as long as I'm not giving up to much for it but if something is locked at 30 then so be it.
Or is it more a Era thing than an age one?
I feel like if I asked most of my gamer work colleagues if they knew what FPS the game they were currently playing ran at, they wouldn't have a clue.
You're absolutely correct it's not. But it's also a likely GOTY with that unstable ass frame rate. Which kinda helps my argument a bit.
Poor John.. this will be complicated to educate this sort of people 😅
And yet it sold like 10 million first weekend, got 96 MC, and is basically a shoe in for GOTY.
People really dont give a crap about framerate as long as the game is good.
True. What I'm trying to say is that pass some visual tricks you will end in the core definition of your game (physics, interactions, living systems and so on) that are cpu dependent and you have to increase your frametime target or rethink your game.