Starfield Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Gargaune]

I will get the game on pc. So the fps problem dosn't really bother me. I am quite impressed with what i saw.

You do realise that if it's running at 30 FPS on consoles then it's probably just optimized like shit, and will therefore run like a turd on PC too, right?

AMD Ryzen 5 7600X 4.7 GHz 6-Core Processor
DeepcoolLT720 85.85 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler
Gigabyte B650 GAMING X AX ATX AM5 Motherboard
Corsair Vengeance 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR5-5200 CL40 Memory
Kingston NV2 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive
Kingston NV2 2 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive
MSI VENTUS 3X OC GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB Video Card
Fractal Design Torrent ATX Mid Tower Case
Corsair RM1000x (2021) 1000 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply

I am not concerned. Also Consoles are generally low in term of hardware.

So with a bit of luck , unchecking some options you may be running starfield on 1080p at 60fps.

Oh come on now lol. I hope that was a joke.

You'll run it with all the bells and whistles on that rig, don't worry, it's just Fallout 4 with bigger assets and some raytracing lipstick. If you want, just guide yourself on Starfield's system requirements vs. Cyberpunk's. The Xbox situation is what is is because the console was borderline outdated right out the door, and it's not like it's unusual for 'em to become bottlenecks three years into their lifecycles.

Starfield has a lot of features as it stands that skyrim dosn't like procedurally generated terrain.

They won't proc-gen terrain, see my earlier post.

 

[tritosine2k]

(...)

(...)

(...)
There is absolutely nothing in hardware level that a console does better than a pc.

you wish:
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/consoles-still-have-advantage-hurting-pc-gaming/

oh what a site this is new!

VESA is attempting to pull the curtain back on response times with ClearMR. This provides a Clear Motion Ratio (CMR), which is a measure of clear to blurry pixels in a set of tests. This is even more comprehensive than GtG and MPRT specs listed together. It looks at the final image, not just a test pattern, and it accounts for sharpening, overdrive, and the motion clarity techniques that gaming monitors use.

ClearMR just launched last year, and only 33 displays are certified right now. Response time is easily one of the most important metrics for gaming, and for years, product listings have done very little to clarify how products stack up. Listing GtG and MPRT is a good first step, but standards like ClearMR encompass even more.

maybe sometime they'll even quantify TAA/DLSS

 

[quixotic]

Uh…….. I never said that.

 

[Robotigan]

The fact that the game is console capped at 30fps while being requiring eyebrow raising cpu specs is very intriguing.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

Will Starfield or Baldurs Gate 3 be better?

 

[Yosharian]

I will get the game on pc. So the fps problem dosn't really bother me. I am quite impressed with what i saw.

You do realise that if it's running at 30 FPS on consoles then it's probably just optimized like shit, and will therefore run like a turd on PC too, right?

AMD Ryzen 5 7600X 4.7 GHz 6-Core Processor
DeepcoolLT720 85.85 CFM Liquid CPU Cooler
Gigabyte B650 GAMING X AX ATX AM5 Motherboard
Corsair Vengeance 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR5-5200 CL40 Memory
Kingston NV2 1 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive
Kingston NV2 2 TB M.2-2280 PCIe 4.0 X4 NVME Solid State Drive
MSI VENTUS 3X OC GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB Video Card
Fractal Design Torrent ATX Mid Tower Case
Corsair RM1000x (2021) 1000 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply

I am not concerned. Also Consoles are generally low in term of hardware.

So with a bit of luck , unchecking some options you may be running starfield on 1080p at 60fps.

Oh come on now lol. I hope that was a joke.

You'll run it with all the bells and whistles on that rig, don't worry, it's just Fallout 4 with bigger assets and some raytracing lipstick. If you want, just guide yourself on Starfield's system requirements vs. Cyberpunk's. The Xbox situation is what is is because the console was borderline outdated right out the door, and it's not like it's unusual for 'em to become bottlenecks three years into their lifecycles.

That rig isn't much better than mine, I have a better processor than that and faster RAM, and I am not expecting Starfield to run well at all

I think people are vastly underestimating Beth's ability to put out a game with fucking awful optimization

 

[Crispy]

I have a brand new top gaming rig.

You promised you wouldn't tell Codex that I built that for you!

Edit: lol I posted this before actually seeing your system's specs. Obv I'd never build a crappy PC like that even for a Codexer.

(No offense)

 

[Crispy]

One of leaked concept art showing easter egg small critter:

See that mountain? You can *RIBBIT!*

 

[Late Bloomer]

Skyrim & Fallout 4 ran great on PC. Fallout 76 had some hiccups but runs great on PC too now. I remember Oblivion running like shit though. I am leary because during their Starfield Direct they didnt like to turn the camera at a reasonable speed. Even then there was noticeable stutter. Still, perhaps I am being optimistic, but I believe it will run smooth on a well equipped PC with minor issues that get ironed out quickly. I believe it will have issues with performance out of the gate on Xbox and perhaps always have issues until they decide to do a performance mode or whatever they call it.

 

[Crispy]

I beg to differ: Skyrim ran like pure shit on day one. Fallout 4 wasn't much better at all.

Skyrim started off in the infamous cart ride and even on a then-top-end SLI rig it was hovering dangerously close to sub-60fps before even making it to the village. In fact I think I remember it indeed dipping into the 50s on my two 970's.

Fallout 4 ran fairly well in the opening Vault but as soon as you stepped outside it was Stutter-Fucking-City, no matter the hardware. It took a long time and lots of patches along with driver updates before it was acceptable IMO.

Edit: I remembered I was running twin GTX 970s at the time, not 760s.

 

[Drakortha]

Will Starfield or Baldurs Gate 3 be better?

What's better, 3 day old dogshit or cat diarrhea?

The diarrhea you could maybe suck up with a straw. Not sure if that'd help much. The dog shit might seem better at first glance. But once you break open the dry exterior layer, the smell hits you.

 

[Late Bloomer]

Edit - I stand corrected on Skyrim running good. My son read what I wrote and was mortified. Reminding me of the particulars in detail. I'll leave what I wrote up regardless. I still have faith Starfield can run good though.

What I remember about Skyrim vanilla, was an issue in Solitude. In particular the Blue Palace from a distance dropping frames. The Civil War had some major performance issues.

As for Fallout 4 the sub 60 performance issues I remember were in downtown boston near Swan and riding on a Vertibird above the city. A family member of mine who plays a lot quicker than I, had some issues with performance during the Bunker Hill faction war. By the time I got to that part it had been patched (not talking about bugs in that area which persist to this day)

I know having weapon debris on caused issues during fights. I never bothered.

Thats my experience with those two games at launch.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Gamers discussing fps:

 

[Kiste]

https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkxn4ChnSAHkji3g6bhixyVHdy9FxtgdTWa

OMG! Look at how it's coming together!

 

[Yosharian]

Fallout 4 still doesn't run well in Boston. It's a fucking shit game when it comes to optimisation. I have to use DLSS to get any kind of decent frame rate in Boston and it's still not very good

 

[Cyberarmy]

Fallout 4 still doesn't run well in Boston.

No fucking way, they just gave up about fixing it then...

 

[Falksi]

If you go over the trailer with a fine tooth comb there’s a lot of questionable shit in it. Like the fact that your ship’s interior isn’t loaded with the planet, you have to switch cells and go through a loading screen everytime you want to go back into your ship.
So you have a loading screen when you fast travel back to your ship, and ANOTHER loading screen to go INSIDE your ship.

Unless I'm mistaken, they haven't specifically shown the fast travel system in action. It's very likely that you'll have the option to fast travel directly inside your ship.

Fast travel is poison anyway unless its done in a controlled, restricted way which gives value to it.

Starfield looks impressive, but I'll wait for the Silt Strider Mod.

 

[Drakortha]

Don't worry guys, it's going to be well optimized this time. Phil Spencer said so.

 

[Reinhardt]

We're inviting all the important people from around the galaxy. That's why we want you to come.

- we're inviting heads of every guild. that's why we want you to come.
- so... i'm the only person invited?

 

[Kiste]

I'll elaborate further, people are saying 30FPS is acceptable due to complexity of the game, here's the thing frame rate has nothing to do with game complexity, it has to do with rendering and art optimisation.

Historically, there were a whole hell of a lot more performance issues with Bethesda games than just inefficient rendering and a lack of art optimisation, though unoptimized art assets were certainly a big one. There was also a ton of inefficient and plainly broken scripting and other wonkiness, some of which was fixed by the community via mods.

 

[Hellraiser]

They won't proc-gen terrain, see my earlier post.

So you want to say they hand crafted heightmaps for the hundreds of celestial bodies instead of using a noise function? I seriously doubt that (although it is 25 years in the making so who knows, maybe that's what they were doing all the time ), unless each planet has a total surface of 1 square kilometer or something before it starts wrapping around. Furthermore at "kind of" planetary scale that's a fucking lot of data even if you store just the vertex coordinates plus the usual UV, normals and whatever else they need to render the terrain (but still the installation size is fucking huge). Finally, do you truly believe bethesda would pick the hard route requiring a lot of effort rather than take shortcuts?

If the game truly lets you land anywhere and keeps reasonable (but not necessarily 100% realistic) scale for the surface then there is no other option than to use a noise function at least as a basis, with some "manual" modification layer for unique planetary features like say "cool crater visible from space so that we can put it in a trailer" (this is what both Kerbal Space Program games do for example, and those have just 16 celestial bodies at the moment). This is what everyone does with planetary scale terrain because it's borderline impossible to create handcrafted terrain at planetary scale that wouldn't on average look worse than a half-decent perlin or simplex noise-based output.

My wild guesses on the planetary "see that moon, you can land there" exploration based on Toddster's obvious lies are:

If you could drive around the fucking planet or fly around it then the Toddster would hype it, so obviously their implementation can't do that.

So I guess if you pick to land at a set of coordinate on a given celestial body the game runs the noise function for something for a preset size of a square chunk of the surface and generates the terrain. Then it rolls some points of interest from prefabs, places them "randomly" using another noise function. You get a visible or invisible barrier if you try to walk outside of the generated chunk of the planet, because of course Bethesda wouldn't be able to do a proper chunking system that would allow for driving a rover around a whole moon or flying above the planet No Man's Sky style without crashing your PC due to bad optimization or at least enormous stutter. Also this hides the monotony/repetitiveness of the terrain generation algorithm and any other flaws (such as seams) that larger maps might have shown easily.

 

[Naraya]

I'm watching the deep dive video. Why is everything so washed out and has this golden/yellow tint nowadays? It reminds me of https://matadornetwork.com/read/yellow-filter-american-movies/

 

[Yosharian]

Fallout 4 still doesn't run well in Boston.

No fucking way, they just gave up about fixing it then...

It's unfixable, the engine simply cannot do, efficiently, what Beth are trying to do with that area. And this is with every modern fix/mod available, and with precombines. At least the game is quite stable now though.

This is partly why I am extremely sceptical that Starfield can actually perform well

 

[Konjad]

View attachment 37303

Finally, the Star Citizen we've been waiting for!

 

[Konjad]

Apparently when you land on a planet, you have a small map to explore (with invisible walls along the edges?). Can't fly your ship around the surface, can't climb a distant mountain, no speeder bikes or land vehicles to speak of. WTF is this? Land on a planet to kill some baddies in a compound or take some pictures of the plants. That's Todd Howard's big, open world space game (Now @ 20FPS and < 10 CTDs per hour!).

Fk this game.

So it's Precursors but worse?