What a horseshit response. When your pc out-specs this console generation and the game runs WORSE, that is poor fucking optimization. Period.

Well, they are pushing the boundaries of their selected technology thats for sure.

Or maybe we can stop feeding into this stupid console vs PC war and admit when one or both are getting shit treatment.

My guy if a game is jumping between even just 20 and 30 fps, you can fucking see it. It’s not pleasant.

THIS I think is the main problem. I haven’t played, but I suspect this was developed Xbox first hence the lack visual options.

the fuck are you talking about?

Another week, another sad nerd diving in front of the bullet for a multi billion dollar corporation when there’s objective proof that the game has bugs and issues.

I have an old AMD FX-8350 CPU, 16GB RAM, and upgraded to a GTX 3060. I lock Starfield to 30FPS on medium settings and it plays well for me. No frame generation, no motion blur, etc.  I don’t need high FPS, just consistent. Before locking it I was getting 30-60FPS but the variation was making me nauseous.

Have you seen the quality presets? While this game is probably the most stable a Bethesda game has ever been, in terms of optimisation, this game is not it. All of their presets has the resolution scaling almost 30-50% lower than native resolution, even High and Ultra. This is unheard of! And if we’re being honest,…

Just add official support for frame generation for fuck sakes.

Bethesda should just support the frame generation.

So - just bear with me now - what if I told you you could actually tell when your framerate drops without actually having to monitor the exact number? What if I also told you that it can be highly distracting when that happens?

I feel like needing 120 fps is ridiculous, personally (ditto for needing ultra high…

Do you have it installed on an SSD or an HDD? If it’s on an HDD that could be your issue. 

They optimized it. Just not very well, especially for people using Nvidia GPUs. And the engine is such an overrburdened creaking ship that the game isn’t going to be able to run well without enough resources to brute force it into submission. I’m not someone who needs 120 fps to be happy — I can get by on the ~30 fps…

Oh Bethesda. Trying to make it sound like they’re pushing all the boundaries of technology while simultaneously using basically the same engine they have for the last 20 plus years. 

my only personal annoyance is that it ran fine during the early access period, and then suddenly its CTD every 5 minutes since launch day. but of course, bethesda says my problem is that i dont meet minimum requirements. then why was it running fine for literal days before?

Have you seen the FPS? This game runs like arse even on cutting edge PC’s

I have fond memories of saving up for the 3dfx voodoo (not sure if original or 2) and then a few years later trading it in along with other games at a local pc game store for a geforce2, back when physical pc cd/dvd games held more value. That was a great card that lasted a while, I think I was still able to run doom…

And as far as jetpacks go, even on low gravity planets they are still only as fast as running anyway.

Seriously, this was by far the stupidest decision they made with Starfield. Most planets are procedurally generated, with a set list of pre-made assets to use and re-use (I’ve come across the same abandoned mine on two separate planets). What the hell is there for us to slow down and experience? Give us a damn rover…