Starfield : Bethesda's space game
Discussion
ZedLeg said:
I'm not that fussed about the frame rate as long as it's stable. I'd rather something run at 30fps all the time, than 60fps most of the time.
Indeed 30fps in something like this is fine as long as it doesn't dip below Base building I can do without but ship building seems fine.
It's free so even if it's not 100% it doesn't really matter
30fps on a AAA game from one of the biggest studios in 2023 in a shambles honestly.
Not saying we need 160fps super twitch levels, but 60fps should absolutely be the norm by now, the difference from 30 is night and day, and this is coming from someone who used to think the whole thing was overblown PC gamer nonsense
Not saying we need 160fps super twitch levels, but 60fps should absolutely be the norm by now, the difference from 30 is night and day, and this is coming from someone who used to think the whole thing was overblown PC gamer nonsense
FourWheelDrift said:
It's a PC game ported to console, we've had enough of s
t quality console ports to PC so, you're welcome 
I have a gaming PC, so your attempt to be cutting and funny with "you're welcome" falls flat. Still, as long as gamers continue to accept last-gen performance, devs will keep serving this slop up. t quality console ports to PC so, you're welcome I think when game dev cycles are creeping towards 5+ years, it's pointless to think of it in generations. If a game comes out and it's good then who cares. Signalis is one of the best games I've played over the last year and it looks like a PS1 game.
The advantages of better graphics are becoming marginal imo.
The advantages of better graphics are becoming marginal imo.
Will this be any better on a PC then an Xbox? I know the question is always yes? But I like the look of this a lot, my type of game, but seeming as I don't have an Xbox or a PC, something will need to be purchased or built and I am wondering whether this is the trigger point to build my first PC rig in about 15 years!
Terry Winks said:
Will this be any better on a PC then an Xbox? I know the question is always yes? But I like the look of this a lot, my type of game, but seeming as I don't have an Xbox or a PC, something will need to be purchased or built and I am wondering whether this is the trigger point to build my first PC rig in about 15 years!
Objectively yes - but obviously PC (equivalent to console) will almost always have a higher entry price.On PC with this game you should get:
Higher FPS - how well optimized it is remains to be seen, but it won't be locked at 30 as per console so in theory you'll get higher;
Mods - they may made mods on console too but I'd imagine it's far more 'regulated', Nexus for PC will have hundreds of mods eventually from tiny bug fixes and improvements to entire game overhauls;
Different resolutions and ratios - I play at 3840x1600 (21:9), I don't know if consoles can play at whatever resolution or ratio they're connected to nowadays as I haven't owned one for years, but I wouldn't go back to non-ultrawide for gaming.
Keyboard / mouse+ controller - use whichever you prefer, for first person games (even RPGs not just FPS), I love KB / mouse.
But then it's hard to argue against a <£500 console plugged into a big telly in front of a comfy armchair! If I had the space and money I'd probably have both and just switch between them depending on my mood. I used to love putting my feet up for a few hours on Skyrim...
Yes, if you have funds for either I think the best decision maker is how you'll play. I have a very punchy gaming PC but hardly use it as can't really have during at my desk after a long day. Much prefer chilling on the couch. Also if you have any gamer friends, where they play may be a factor in your decisions making as well
Mastodon2 said:
I already had low expectations for this, but they are now even lower given that the game will run at 30fps on the Series X. Microsoft must be tearing their collective hair out over the badly-optimised turds their studios are turning out.
30fps is laughable nowadays. Don’t think I would want to play that on a big tv. Don Roque said:
30FPS is a bit of an embarrassing farce in this day and age but they get away with it because they're hoping to appeal to those with low expectations or those who seem unable to recognise a faster frame rate.
Personally, I'm more interested in playability / storyline / immersion than the FPS. I think it's a case of different expectations rather than low expectations. 
Don Roque said:
30FPS is a bit of an embarrassing farce in this day and age but they get away with it because they're hoping to appeal to those with low expectations or those who seem unable to recognise a faster frame rate.
30fps at 4k for the Xbox X for what is in comparison a 2070 Super and 30fps at 1440p for the S which is at best a 7 year old GTX 1070 or at worst a 1060 3GB. It's a step on from Fallout 4 (released 8 years ago) which could manage 60fps at 4k on the X. I'd have preferred it if they dropped the current consoles, launched just on PC and then waited for the next generation of console before releasing. Then you won't have to buy it twice."Starfield was never going to be 60FPS on Xbox consoles, and for good reason"
https://www.windowscentral.com/gaming/starfield-wa...
https://www.windowscentral.com/gaming/starfield-wa...
FourWheelDrift said:
"Starfield was never going to be 60FPS on Xbox consoles, and for good reason"
https://www.windowscentral.com/gaming/starfield-wa...
So having recently spent a chunk to build an entirely new PC (built around a Ryzen 5 - 7600x cpu) but having to reuse my existing 5700xt GPU for the moment- I might actually be ok! https://www.windowscentral.com/gaming/starfield-wa...
Gassing Station | Video Games | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff