Starfield Thread - now with Shattered Space horror expansion

[processdaemon]

And then Starfield has higher specs than BG3, so you have to factor in PC players who would buy but cant run it on their own rig. You might be surprised at how many there are.

Do they? I played both on an ancient 10 year old rig with only otherwise 5 year old card. Of course both on minimum details but perfectly playable. I think all this "SUCH HIGH HARDWARE REQUIREMENTS" are a meme, only people who cannot play on anything below high/ultra complain.

Yeah, I played both on a second hand gaming laptop with

these specs, not super bad but certainly below Starfield's minimum PC requirements

and only get occasional stuttering when entering a big area with a lot of characters for the first time.

 

[darkpatriot]

This is my first Bethesda game I am playing using an SSD. It makes it so loading screens don't really bother me at all.

they say in the steam requirements that the game requires an SSD, so maybe all those complaints are from people playin on HDD?

I think some people are just hung up on stuff being seemless. I kind of get the idea of everything being one connected world space, and think that is neat if they can.

But I don't get the people who try and claim it is for realism. Because seemless transitions just use different types of abstractions that aren't really any more realistic. They generally have everything scaled down to make it fit into an area the player can travel around in a reasonable amount of time.

So they are okay with the abstraction of downscaling time and space, but not okay with the abstraction of load screens, even if those load screens would represent more realistic depictions of time and space.

But everyone has different feelings about what kind of abstractions are acceptable for them and what kind take them out of the immersion of the game world.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

And yeah, I could just move my GTX 1060 to the new PC, but I'd rather leave it and play the few popamole games I play in the living room, while I use my new PC for more prestigious stuff.

Wonder if it's worth investing into a 'gaming laptop' for playing older games. Was tempted at one point to get one, but - besides being unable to replace most parts unlike with a PC - what made me decide against it is that many of them suffer from heating issues.

 

[Vic]

one good thing about the copy pasted dungeons is at least you know where all the loot is

I think some people are just hung up on stuff being seemless. I kind of get the idea of everything being one connected world space, and think that is neat if they can.

I think they come from playing No Man's Sky so it must come to them as a shock a bit.

 

[Vic]

Yeah, I played both on a second hand gaming laptop with

woah dude, how did you manage to run Starfield with this graphics card

 

[Cyberarmy]

and only get occasional stuttering when entering a big area with a lot of characters for the first time.

And nearly everyone are getting those stutters of hicups.

 

[Johnny Biggums]

And then Starfield has higher specs than BG3, so you have to factor in PC players who would buy but cant run it on their own rig. You might be surprised at how many there are.

Do they? I played both on an ancient 10 year old rig with only otherwise 5 year old card. Of course both on minimum details but perfectly playable. I think all this "SUCH HIGH HARDWARE REQUIREMENTS" are a meme, only people who cannot play on anything below high/ultra complain.

Yeah, I played both on a second hand gaming laptop with

these specs, not super bad but certainly below Starfield's minimum PC requirements

View attachment 41088

and only get occasional stuttering when entering a big area with a lot of characters for the first time.

First, if some ppl prefer to play ultra high on gamepass rather than ultra low on their own rig, it doesnt affect the argument about concurrent players/purchasers.

Second, what can I say, I have seen a bunch of these ppl on discord, and you're out of touch if you think every goyslop enjoyer who wants to play Starfield on PC opening week has those specs.

 

[darkpatriot]

And then Starfield has higher specs than BG3, so you have to factor in PC players who would buy but cant run it on their own rig. You might be surprised at how many there are.

Do they? I played both on an ancient 10 year old rig with only otherwise 5 year old card. Of course both on minimum details but perfectly playable. I think all this "SUCH HIGH HARDWARE REQUIREMENTS" are a meme, only people who cannot play on anything below high/ultra complain.

Yeah, I played both on a second hand gaming laptop with

these specs, not super bad but certainly below Starfield's minimum PC requirements

View attachment 41088

and only get occasional stuttering when entering a big area with a lot of characters for the first time.

I am also playing on an older system and have no performacne issues.

Most of the performance issues people mention seem to primarily be on high end systems. So it is probably that it just isn't very optimized for whatever the latest and greatest is for high end graphics cards, but it is optimized just fine for performance on lower end systems.

Which doesn't bother me at all and I can't help roll my eyes at every upset poster who is raging that they can only get 50-60 FPS at the highest settings rather than the 130 fps they think they should be getting. You can't even tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS, lol.

The human eye will notice when the framerate changes though, so you are better off capping your framerate.

 

[Yosharian]

I'm curious now, how many fps did you get on a Haswell in any of the big cities in Starfield or in BG3 act 3?

25-30 (I didn't play Starfield much but I assume New Atlantis counts?), I guess if you tried looking hard enough you would probably find something below, but I don't play watching FPS counter all the time.

Admittively, there were also some micro-stutters in some area transitions (entering a building etc).

Surprisingly enough though, in combat I rarely had any stutter or noticeable FPS drop, but AI did sometimes think for a while during turns in BG3).

I really don't mean to be condescending but I cannot fathom how you can happily play a game at sub-30 FPS in this day and age

 

[Yosharian]

Some Codexers be like "I have no performance problems at all, it runs butter smooth at 30 FPS!!"

 

[Konjad]

And yeah, I could just move my GTX 1060 to the new PC, but I'd rather leave it and play the few popamole games I play in the living room, while I use my new PC for more prestigious stuff.

Wonder if it's worth investing into a 'gaming laptop' for playing older games. Was tempted at one point to get one, but - besides being unable to replace most parts unlike with a PC - what made me decide against it is that many of them suffer from heating issues.

Avoid gaming laptops (unless you're a student or don't have stable place that is).

But some used old Thinkpad with integrated GPU (up to T430/x230, but best choice would be T420/X220, they were the most modern with good keyboards) for games up to 2004 or so would be probably a good choice. You can still find refubrished batteries even, I think.

 

[Vic]

You can't even tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS, lol.

you absolutely can if your monitor supports it

 

[Yosharian]

You can't even tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS, lol.

Ohhh I see the problem. You're mentally retarded.

 

[Konjad]

Some Codexers be like "I have no performance problems at all, it runs butter smooth at 30 FPS!!"

For a 10 yo PC? Yeah, I'd have expected games nowadays would be a slideshow

I'm curious now, how many fps did you get on a Haswell in any of the big cities in Starfield or in BG3 act 3?

25-30 (I didn't play Starfield much but I assume New Atlantis counts?), I guess if you tried looking hard enough you would probably find something below, but I don't play watching FPS counter all the time.

Admittively, there were also some micro-stutters in some area transitions (entering a building etc).

Surprisingly enough though, in combat I rarely had any stutter or noticeable FPS drop, but AI did sometimes think for a while during turns in BG3).

I really don't mean to be condescending but I cannot fathom how you can happily play a game at sub-30 FPS in this day and age

If it's not PvP it doesn't bother me at all. Also, these were the most demanding areas he asked about. Usually FPS was higher, 40+

 

[Fedora Master]

 

[ind33d]

one good thing about the copy pasted dungeons is at least you know where all the loot is

I think some people are just hung up on stuff being seemless. I kind of get the idea of everything being one connected world space, and think that is neat if they can.

I think they come from playing No Man's Sky so it must come to them as a shock a bit.

daggerfall was the same way, you could find quest items based on the most likely spawns

 

[Levenmouth]

People discuss comparisons between CP77 and SF and I have got to say that even thought SF is a resource hog and has some ancient lighting system, I like the overall appearance more than that of CP77. Everything in SF is very sharp (proc gen crap excluded), whereas CP77 felt like it was a wash. I don't know if it was the design or some filter, but the graphics in that game always irked me. I played it on launch on a 3080 at 4K, so I don't think my settings were the issue.

 

[Mebrilia the Viera Queen]

My new ship design is pretty performant i have to say decent haul nice weapons and overall speed and resistance.

You sound like paid shill.

Paid shill? I told the game is far from perfect.
You are only allowed to like a game totally or don't like it all? This is how it works?

 

[Mebrilia the Viera Queen]

My new ship design is pretty performant i have to say decent haul nice weapons and overall speed and resistance.

did you build this yourself? looks really cool

Yes i built it myself

 

[HeatEXTEND]

You can't even tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS, lol.

you absolutely can if your monitor supports it

You can't even tell the difference between 60 FPS and 120 FPS, lol.

Ohhh I see the problem. You're mentally retarded.

They fell for it lol.

 

[ArchAngel]

About hardware requirements, why someone even buy a expensive pc nowadays? Except for work? Because lets be real, imagine buying a high end gaming pc and having ... Forspoken, Starfield and other games that try as hard as possible to have ugly characters to play...

Exactly. I actually built a new PC, I've got everything but I was just waiting for GPU prices to drop down to get it and when they went down I realized... what would I even get it for? Cyberprank, BG3 and Starfield, only one of which is a good game? And anyway I just played them on my old trash I moved to living room so... meh. I might as well wait a generation or two of GPUs until there is actually something I would need a new GPU for.

And yeah, I could just move my GTX 1060 to the new PC, but I'd rather leave it and play the few popamole games I play in the living room, while I use my new PC for more prestigious stuff.

This is why I bought Xbox Series X instead. It is not expensive but it is strong enough for current generation of trash. And actually good RPGs that do not need to use best graphics work well enough on my old I5-4590 CPU and GTX 960 GPU

 

[Orud]

Bro MS owns gamepass

Yeah, but Gamepass costs about 7 times less than 1 standard copy of Starfield. Gamepass isn't some magic money maker, there's a certain methodology behind it. If it doesn't lead to people staying subscribed for an additional 5-6 months, or without a direct purchase, Microsoft will still lose money.

 

[processdaemon]

Yeah, I played both on a second hand gaming laptop with

woah dude, how did you manage to run Starfield with this graphics card

I don't know what to tell you, it hasn't met a game that it can't run on low-medium settings yet and as long as it works I won't replace it until I can smell smoke.

 

[Vic]

I did it boys

 

[Vic]

Yeah, but Gamepass costs about 7 times less than 1 standard copy of Starfield. Gamepass isn't some magic money maker, there's a certain methodology behind it. If it doesn't lead to people staying subscribed for an additional 5-6 months, or without a direct purchase, Microsoft will still lose money.

these subscriptions are more profitable than you think because people are too lazy to cancel them so they just keep them running, getting somebody to subscribe (via starfield) is good business already