Hmmm, I see.
I would be surprised if they aren’t impressed with how Starfield looks, sans the framerate of course. And Forza.
On the contrary, I’d be shock if they found Starfield to be impressive lol.
1 Like
Really? I just don’t get this negativity since the reveal at all. It was a whole different tune last year.
And it IS impressive.
I don’t think they did themselves any favors in it’s presentation. I think the scale of the game is very impressive. Everything else was … shrugs, especially knowing what DF looks for in a game.
People will probably change their tune once the actual game comes out and is in their hands.
Putting aside the framerate issues, whenever they focused on the interior sections, the game looked genuinely good. IMO, the inconsistency in the presentation was present when they showed some of the outdoor locations.
Yeah I largely agree with this statement, hence why I said “they didn’t do themselves any favors with the presentation” especially the first half of the video.
1 Like
You mean the planets that are being shown after Todd mentioned the 1000 planets? Because some of those indeed don’t look as impressive as others but everything before that looks very fine to me.
But I thought it was a fine deep dive, except the framerate and the inconsistent hit reactions. I really digged everything else. Ah well.
1 Like
Yeah, but I wouldn’t be concerned as the game has 6+ months of development left 
True that. And I’m also just going to take into account a possible second delay. It would suck, but from here on out I’m just going to look at gaming this way.
1 Like
I guess so - nobody will blame you.
John Linneman was pretty concerned on Twitter about Starfield. Got a bit in a discussion with him. Some people just need their worries 
3 Likes
His concern was with the game feeling potentially bloated due to the ‘1000 planets’.
Its called Starfield.
3 Likes
No worries, they did find both games to be impressive and had a lot of good things to say about both. There were some criticisms with Starfield, and for good reason IMO, but it was overall positive. Honestly, I was most surprised none of them mentioned the particle effects running at half rate. That stuck out to me big time. Their biggest concern seemed to be performance more than anything else.
Still going through the video but it’s positive so far.
Edit: Really the only thing they were a bit down on tech-wise is Red Fall, but nothing they said was really wrong. I found the game to be sorely lacking in tech and honestly, my critiques would be more harsh than what they discussed.
2 Likes
He should know by now that it’s just “16 times the detail.”, Radiant quests in Skyrim. Todd being Todd.
1 Like
Particle effects I had not even noticed, but the choppy framerate overall is what really stood out. It’s a bit in-BGS to showcase their game that way. I can understand criticism about the performance. Can only hope the final game will look close to this and run smooth (30fps I’m guessing) on XSX.
I haven’t watched the DF video myself, but visually, the only thing going for Redfall is its art style (which I like) imo. Hope the team at Arkane make use of the extra time and make it more polished. Other than that, can’t wait for the game!
I wouldn’t be surprised if the performance is the main reason it was delayed, it’s something that probably wouldnt have stopped it coming out before the acquisition
I might be wrong on this but I feel like the release date was announced after the acquisition? I do agree with the prospect that MS would afford them more time to have a greater impact right out of the gate though.
That, and the flying not being optimal yet. And the ex dev also said they had a overabundance of content and trying to find the fun. I didn’t get that bit, what he meant with that.