-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry: Starfield - Xbox Series X/ Xbox Series S - Performance & Graphics Breakdown
- Thread starter adamsapple
- Start date
MarkMe2525
Member
Do you expect ign to lose access after publishing a rating of 7 for starfield?
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
30fps is tragic. Thanks series S. Praise PC.
GigaBowser
The bear of bad news
This game looks goord if they let me do the OTs it woulda higher scores
Destruction-1002
Member
Bethesda always used their crappy engine that have roots in late 90s
However this game manage to be less buggy than their previous games
Fart Knight
Al Pachinko, Konami President
Another HDR fail
supernova8
Banned
Yeah absolutely, but I'm willing to avatar-bet that: 1) the next Elder Scrolls game is still on that god awful engine and 2) Todd Howard will try to convince everyone that it's a new engine
Which is a shame because the fact that they can deliver this (ie Starfield) with such an old shitty engine proves how good they are as a software team. Imagine what they could give us with something better tailored to what these consoles offer.
Last edited:
Fart Knight
Al Pachinko, Konami President
Did DF forget to mention the HDR & SDR issue?
They dont seem to care about it as much anymore.
Elysium44
Banned
I wish the industry had never gone down this road in the first place. All the Resident Evil games since RE7 are washed out on my screen and it's a common complaint. You either choose between able to see things but it's washed out, or it's too dark. The older Resident Evil engine games looked great. Other games have similar issues and now Starfield is yet another one.
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
Why aren't you talking about the Series X?
Is it 4k on Series X? That's how they sold that one, right?
What about PS5, are all games on that platform 4k, or does that not matter either?
Kenneth Haight
Gold Member
Kenneth Haight
Gold Member
PlayStation haven’t yet released a first party title on PS5 that doesn’t have an option for 60fps. That’s my main gripe with this release on console. MS may as well release their next console now as the majority of people with any sense who want to play their titles ( and possibly PlayStations going forward) will invest in a good PC if they want to play these titles as they’re meant to be enjoyed.
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
Why do you care? If you're playing Starfield on pc, why do you care what framerate it is on console?
Fwiw, I don't think 30fps is good news at all, but I'm not about to sell the console and drop a couple of thousand on a pc because Starfield is 30fps. Barely anyone would do that.
GHG
Member
In a world where Microsoft doesn't buy Zenimax, this title would have been expected to launch at 30 FPS on the XSX/PS5. If you're an XSX user, how is the "current" situation worse?
They are deathly afraid of letting go of their legacy software which they rely on for mods. They desperately need to bite the bullet to actually get back to being impressive like oblivion at the console launch moment because so far they have been very underwhelming and they prefer to play it safe...but eh gamebyro is our fate until todd retires.
Winter John
Gold Member
Gotta say I'm disappointed by how well it runs on my S. I held back on trading it in for an X because I expected a total fan melting disaster. Sadly it runs fine I guess. Been playing for an hour or so with zero issues.
supernova8
Banned
Before we even talk about PC performance, I'm just wondering what about this game (visually or mechanically) warrants it not running at a locked 60fps on Series X if they're only targeting native 1440p. Even if we go with the argument that Series S held the "base version" back, that would actually favour the "wait so why isn't it running at 60fps" camp.
We already know now the game isn't as "seamless" as people thought (regardless of what Todd and co. did or didn't say) and that it's essentially just instancing "mini Minecraft maps" to borrow that Youtube dude's wording. On top of that, they've got a bunch of loading screens all over the place.
Sure it looks nice but there's nothing visually groundbreaking going on.
Last edited:
DragonNCM
Member
Playstation first party games are "corridor" handholding games with strictly handcrafted graphics & precalculated movements & minimal realtime physic's & that's why they are 60fps. Only game that I can think of as good open world is Horizon forbidden west & that is usual casual game with casual RPG elements.
You cant compare Starfield with anything what Sony is developing. Do you think if Starfield was developed for PS5 would be different?
I don't know what people are expecting from 500$, 3 year old tech. Just look at PC performance for Starfield & you will understand why it is 30fps on consoles.
If you have complains about console go & get 2k$ PC & play Starfield there.
GHG
Member
Here:
I think with a few tweaks and potentially some lower than low setting mods then it will eventually end up being a locked 30fps on the deck. Fsr3 might eventually help as well.
Last edited:
akaFullmetal
Member
Well I'm impressed the game is very stable, the 10 month delay actually helped it seems. GG Bethesda.
Only complaint is vegetation still looks mixed with this engine I guess.
Only complaint is vegetation still looks mixed with this engine I guess.
Stafford
Member
So DF don't mention at all how the game basically has broken HDR but also SDR? The latter is absolutely nuts to me. Whenever a game has trash HDR you can at least rely on good old SDR. There aren't even brightness/gamma settings?
You'd think a space game gets black levels correct, I'd say it's essential. Sigh. Hopefully that day one patch, but this should be a standard thing.
You'd think a space game gets black levels correct, I'd say it's essential. Sigh. Hopefully that day one patch, but this should be a standard thing.
Zathalus
Member
They don't usually talk about HDR for whatever reason. Cyberpunk and Red Dead Redemption 2 both had utterly broken HDR at launch and DF never mentioned anything about it.
Caio
Member
I don't think it's an average looking game, considering the scope of the Game. By the way, I'm happy Bethesda have improved from the previous games in terms of "polish" and Graphics/Performance. DF also confirmed this.
Fake
Member
RDR2 have a video explaininh how HDR is broken at the point of permanent damage your TV screen.
Zathalus
Member
In the initial console comparison?
Fake
Member
HDR video. HDR videos used to be more complex because they are heavy one and IDK if Youtube charges them in the process.
edit: Another point to make, Oliver is not a HDR expert. Those are job for John and Rich.
Last edited:
Stafford
Member
They did have a video about it when it was "fixed". At least the game has proper SDR. I read that if you make a screenshot on Xbox that the black levels appear fine.
Really hope this is fixed on September 6
Zathalus
Member
Yeah, but they didn't at launch. They do the occasional HDR video but it's not exactly a focus of thiers.
Immortals of Aveum recently released with zero HDR and DF had three articles about the game but zero mention of HDR missing. I think they can put more focus on it.
Fake
Member
I remember watching Days Gone HDR video a long time ago, in the the start of that video Rich adress that they slow down the HDR videos because there are poor HDR games to cover.
Gen.Grievous
Member
Disappointing performance. Especially on PC to see the 4090 struggle to hit 60 fps at 4K while the graphics are nothing special.
I don't even own a PS5 and know that is bullshit. Spiderman and Horizon are open world games and both have 60 fps modes. The engine used for Starfield is stretched beyond it's limits and it's showing even on PC.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Wonder it Alex will go balls deep into the shadow and lighting inaccuracies he was so obsessed about with HZD back in the day on here, when he would compare every (Sony) game to Star Citizen.
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
The framerate is CPU, not GPU bound.
twilo99
Member
If it’s just for this game I don’t think the x upgrade is worth it to be honest..
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
not gonna lie they had us in the first half.
Kenneth Haight
Gold Member
And Starfield is super hardcore is it? No that’s correct Sony aren’t developing anything on this scale that I’m aware of. I understand why this is limited and it would be similar on PS5 probably and I still wouldn’t buy it there if it was. As you rightly say the masses do not care about frame rate but it’s nice to have options.
Physiognomonics
Member
Are (ground) textures always this blurry or this is caused by the footage?Other than the two above locations, the game is practically locked 30 FPS everywhere.
Mr Moose
Member
What's your avatar of?
Regarding this DF video, at the beginning it clarifies that this video is only about technical data, resolution, performance, etc.
Analysis of the game's graphics, lighting, animations, textures and other visual details will be addressed by John (on Series X/S) and Alex (PC) in the next few days/hours
Analysis of the game's graphics, lighting, animations, textures and other visual details will be addressed by John (on Series X/S) and Alex (PC) in the next few days/hours
MonkeyClaw36
Member
PS5 0p
Last edited:
Kataploom
Gold Member
Well, I have not seen s single PS game that pushes the CPU at all, they're always GPU bound so making lower resolution and downscaled graphically versions of games to run at 60 fps isn't exactly rocket science...
Last edited:
