Hey I’m happy to agree to disagree. I think Bethesda’s history, recent events with Redfall, and Starfield’s performance profiles being a talking point, with Phil even commenting on it, before it was confirmed makes reporting on it an understandable thing. If there wasn’t so many conversations surrounding Starfield and what frame rate it would run at before we found out, I doubt there would be the reporting we saw. It wasn’t reported in a negative way, so I don’t see the harm as I don’t put any weight into what the trolls say because at the end of the day, even if Starfield ran at 60fps, those idiots would still find something to complain about. They aren’t worth paying attention to IMO and ultimately I think the discourse they present online is poisonous towards general topics about any game. It’s entirely fair to disagree with any of that though.
I just take issue with most conversations surrounding any exclusives being boiled down to media bias. If FF wasn’t an exclusive and performed equally on all platforms, I doubt most of these conversations would be happening in this thread right now.
No game design wise, the N64 if needed could have run RE4 or the remake. They’re not going anything really remarkable .
It is disrespectful to a developer who spent to last 6 years making a game from the ground up to take full advantage of the Series consoles that it could be done on the XBox One. Did John Linneman not even watch the showcase of the games last year or in early January? The Jaguar cores of the Xbox One could handle a 48% increase over the physics simulation of Forza 7
Great post. Most people with common sense would know that Starfield was never going to run at 60 FPS on the consoles. I think there is a case for the Series X having a 40 FPS mode mind, maybe it be patched in at a latter date, for now I think the team just want to get the game out.
Redfall was just a mess of a game, so much of the game is broken, before you even move on the its framerate Its also running on a engine the developer was not used too which never helped matters either
Starfield is going to be largely cpu bound. There is no magic optimisation that can ensure it’s locked at 30FPS. None on the world.
It will not be.
People need to know and understand this now. If there are points in the game where the cpu is bottlenecked - and in an open world game offering huge freedom and massive object tracking this will happen - no magic can ensure the FPS stays at 30.
I’d assumed Starfield would be 30fps because Todd already made some murky comments at E3 last year how he prefers higher fidelity over performance.
I assume if you stack 200 boxes and throw a grenade, the framerate will absolutely tank. But hopefully it stays stable during regular exploration and combat scenarios.
I’m facing reality here: all the debates around framerate & pixel counting have been settled… by the cost of gaming hardware.
The PS5 is 550 euros (disc version) & Final Fantasy 16 plays best at 30 fps & the resolution can go pretty low (especially in ‘performance mode’ which never even hits a consistent 60 fps). The Series X is soon-to-be 550 euros & its biggest release of the year (Starfield) is 30 fps. PC hardware has also reached exorbitant prices.
Prices of games & services are going up as well across the industry, ergo those who’re praying for a mid-gen console refresh are probably also in for a rude awakening (either it won’t happen, or it will but the cost will be so ridiculously high only a select few will jump in).
So consoles are no longer about performance, they’re about cost effectiveness for the hardware manufacturers.
Moral of the story? You better get used to 30 fps & 1080p (sometimes lower) with FSR & tricks like that because that’s all the vast majority of consumers will be able to afford, me included. I’m not blowing thousands of euros chasing 60fps in video games (certainly when PC optimization is questionable in many cases anyway).
So there it is, 30fps gaming or bust. Tbh our eyes do adapt (I know from experience).
Why design your games assets with such a high geometry detail to then render it in 720p with no use of temporal sampling whatsoever? This is barely better image quality than on late 360 games.
The likes of DF have done a lot of disservice to games IMO. Far too much focus on frames and GFX To say that because a game is under 30FPS its unplayable was silly and not needed didn’t agreed with the team over Cyberpunk.
If it a driving or FPS I get the need to aim (pardon the pun) for 60 FPS but an open world game or a slow-paced horror title or big adventure game I do not, would rather have 30 FPS with top of the range visuals and loads of effects
The reactions are very different per person it seems. John from DF said it’s really good to his eyes, but I’ve seen plenty comments of people that find it very bad in quality mode.
When it comes to motion blur, anytime someone tells me it’s great, my reaction is can I turn it off? If I can’t I will deal with it, if I can it’s gone. I just really dislike motion blur, film grain and chromic distortion. My hope for all future games is the ability to turn it all off.
The N64 struggled to run games with just a couple characters on screen, no way would it run RE4, no matter how much they cut the graphics down. The village fight alone would set an N64 on fire lol.
I also find it interesting that you consider their conversation Forza disrespectful, even though technically they weren’t wrong and they were just bringing up hypotheticals, but wouldn’t that mean you’re being disrespectful towards to the RE4 team by saying it can run on an N64? FWIW I don’t think either conversation is being disrespectful, it’s all just innocent hypotheticals on what games can be ported to what hardware.
I agree that it’s a lot to ask for a game with this scope to run perfect 100% of the time. As long as it’s smooth most of the time, I don’t think most would be bothered if there were slight dips in busy areas or when the screen fills up with alpha effects. Where I think it’ll be an issue is if it dips often and the drops are severe.
Exactly, too big of an ask, especially during heavy fights in big open and detailed areas. I don’t expect that. But interiors, more closed off, more linear I hope it can stay mostly stable. In a early analysis of a indoor part it indicated drops to 20fps, but we just gotta wait and see. Others have said this likely was footage of way older builds.
I wonder, do we know if there are load times when we enter a city or even big bases ala Skyrim?
Yeah. The problem is not digital foundry or anything but how their analysis is weaponised. I’m sure you can in the final product find ways to get this sub 20FPS on even the highest end PCs. But it doesn’t really tell the story. But static screenshots are weaponised.
The sad thing is it wouldn’t matter if DF was around or not, fanboys will find things to use as ammo in their silly war. Halo’s Craig is a perfect example of that. That’s why I’ve always said it’s best people not pay attention to them. Diving in console war culture, even if people don’t participate but just view, warps views and is toxic to how people view the game industry, media, and communities at large IMO.
Interesting early look at Phantom Liberty. As someone who used to be a huge CD Projekt Red fan and was really let down by the broken promises in the launch version of Cyberpunk, I’m really looking forward to the changes with this expansion, especially since they carry over to the base game as well. I’m surprised to see the resolution figures actually go down with this update, but it does make sense since the expansion is going to be more demanding with a focus on current gen hardware. Hopefully the team can sort out the performance issues before launch.
