Starfield is 4K/30 on Series X, 1440/30 on Series S

Maxwell Jacob Friedman said:
The switch wasnt touting itself as the nost powerful console ever created and rode the power narrative lol
Click to expand...

Does that mean there were never gonna be 30 FPS games on it? We've already had a handful of games launch at 30 FPS on PS5/SX in the last couple of years.

Why are you acting like this is the first one, lol.
 
Last edited:
feynoob said:
Considering Bethesda games, it kind is. You are going to interact with any object that is in this game.
Click to expand...
Not any object, just most objects that are highlighted They've done this in every game they've made since Morrowind (and with physics since Oblivion).

I love their games and this will be the largest and the one with most game systems working together, but that doesn't make them impossible before now on consoles.
 
adamsapple said:
Does that mean there were never gonna be 30 FPS games on it? We've already had a handful of games launch at 30 FPS on PS5/SX in the last couple of years.

Why are you acting like this is the first one, lol.
Click to expand...
Dont ask me, ask the executive


Lmao 30 fps in 2023, lord almighty, hows that power narrative
 
Mister Wolf said:
Spiderman 2 takes place in a city with a bunch of similar looking buildings, doesn't even have a day/night cycle, nor does it have real-time GI. The game is lacking compared to other open world games which is why there is no surprise it can achieve 60fps.
Click to expand...

SM2 will be one of the most impressive looking open world games on the market come release let's not be silly. But anyway, enough with the SM2 talk I used that as an example.
 
R6Rider said:
Not any object, just most objects that are highlighted They've done this in every game they've made since Morrowind (and with physics since Oblivion).

I love their games and this will be the largest and the one with most game systems working together, but that doesn't make them impossible before now on consoles.
Click to expand...
Xbox one and PS4 cyberpunk 2077 disagrees with you.
 
Lots of replies wondering why they can't just lower to 1080p or drop graphical settings to achieve 60fps. It is probably not that simple due to the scope of the game.

There appear to be a lot of complex systems and processes running in this game at once. This isn't just a graphics thing at this point, all of these separate systems cost resources to implement and something has to give to allow for that.

Phil saying that it's a creative decision is probably not far from the truth. Creatively, they want to make something big and ambitious and so they had to decide between narrowing the scope or making the game they want but lower the framerate to get them there.

I'd like to know what the system requirements are for PC at this point. I think even my modest build (12700K, 3080) is going to be pushed quite hard for 1440p60.
 
R6Rider said:
Nothing shown was anything that is only possible on the newer consoles.

I think the game will be fantastic despite this.
Click to expand...
There is absolutely no way (at least not reasonably) that this game would run on that Jaguar CPU of the older platforms. Those consoles could barely run Cyberpunk 2077 which isn't anywhere near as close to how ambitious this game is in scope.

In fact I would love DF to test this out on a PC made up of components similar to a PS4. That would be really interesting to watch.
 
This shit sucks man. Grown ups man behaving like this is weird. It's a just a video game. Why are they going to such a length to act like this?
 
Ywap said:
30 fps and motion blur.... In other words unplayable on console. This shit should be illegal.

Let's atleast hope they have a very serious health warning. Watching that smeary mess for hours will most certainly give severe complications.
Click to expand...
Your trolling shit should be illegal. 30 FPS =unplayable ? I've never read such drivel in all my life
 
adamsapple said:
Does that mean there were never gonna be 30 FPS games on it? We've already had a handful of games launch at 30 FPS on PS5/SX in the last couple of years.

Why are you acting like this is the first one, lol.
Click to expand...

The reality will hit them eventually that these consoles still have poor CPUs when it comes right down to it. A big step up from the atrocities of last-gen, but nothing to write home about (I'd venture a guess that the average $100 CPU can out work them easily, especially when the consoles are forced to use the GDDR6 memory and the limited cache situation). That's the breaks, it is what it is.

Personally, I don't care about the what and the why, so long as the end result is acceptable to me. A game with this kind of scope and scale at 30fps I don't have a problem with, something that looks and plays like an upres last-gen effort I'd complain more about.

They are saying they are up to 60fps at times as it is, maybe they keep working on that and we get a surprise 60fps/VRR mode anyway. Time will tell.
 
Last edited:
RickSanchez said:
Laughs in 4090.

But seriously damn, why not give a 1080p 60fps option for Series X ? Does everybody have 4K screens now ?
Click to expand...
the funny this is Series S runs this game at 1440/30fps
You telling me Series X unable to run this game at 1440/60fps? or 1080/60fps?

come the fuck on
 
adamsapple said:
Look at Plague Tale: Requiem and all the cut-backs they made with the 60 FPS mode.

If that was the kind of cuts, most of us would probably opt in for the 30 FPS mode.
Click to expand...

Yet they were able to keep graphics intact in 40fps mode. I see no reason why starfield couldn't run 40fps on series x, even with some reductions majority of 120hz tv owners would prefer it.
 
I honestly don't think that the game will necessarily suffer from 30fps as long as the performance is stable enough and nothing is gamebreaking.

There will be catches related to the depth of combat questlines etc, but we can't know what those will be like until the game releases.
 
Bojji said:
Yet they were able to keep graphics intact in 40fps mode. I see no reason why starfield couldn't run 40fps on series x, even with some reductions majority of 120hz tv owners would prefer it.
Click to expand...

Sure, I also hope there's at least a 40hz mode in Starfield. But even despite that and counting both of those as genuine-ass 'new gen only' games, Starfield is a league of its own in terms of complexity.
 
Another One Drake GIF by DJ Khaled


Another reason not to own a console.

Not in any rush to play this so I'll grab it at 1080p 60 fps when there's a steam sale.
 
Last edited:
feynoob said:
This shit sucks man. Grown ups man behaving like this is weird. It's a just a video game. Why are they going to such a length to act like this?
Click to expand...

Ego investment. For some a stark realization they may have bought the wrong console. For others the grim reality that $500 won't get you the luxury experience.
 
I want clarification on the console FoV. At least give me a slider up to 90 horizontal.
 
Last edited:
I guess this is a wait and see. If this game is so fleshed out and detailed that it warrants the 30fps on series X then so be it. People arguing graphics need to be pushed forward but my guess is, it's no more technical or graphically advanced then most games and this is where I'll be disappointed. I would of liked to see 1440p/60 on the X. I just don't believe it couldn't be done without more optimisation/tweaking. I don't believe the bullshit about not wanting to sacrifice anything.
 
lh032 said:
the funny this is Series S runs this game at 1440/30fps
You telling me Series X unable to run this game at 1440/60fps? or 1080/60fps?

come the fuck on
Click to expand...

The systems have nearly the same CPUs. What would give the XSX the ability to double the frame rate here? That extra few hundred mhz? I have my doubts.

GPU obviously not a bottleneck here with XSS at 1440.
 
FoxMcChief said:
NMS can't do story, ground combat with tons of ways to approach enemies, spacecraft modification, basically anything fun. But it can show tons of pop-in when taking off and landing.
Click to expand...
okay now you're being disingenuous to NMS, honestly embrace it cause NMS now is a fantastic game like no other and Starfield is a better, more HD , version of it with a better story (likely)
 
tmlDan said:
okay now you're being disingenuous to NMS, honestly embrace it cause NMS now is a fantastic game like no other and Starfield is a better, more HD , version of it with a better story (likely)
Click to expand...
I don't think I am. I enjoyed my time with NMS. 160 hours on Xbox, 124 hours on Steam and I can't seem to find my hours played on the PS5 (I played it on PS4).

NMS has come a long way. I still talk to coworkers about it that play it in VR on PC. It doesn't seem to do most things that Starfield does.
 
DaGwaphics said:
The systems have nearly the same CPUs. What would give the XSX the ability to double the frame rate here? That extra few hundred mhz? I have my doubts.

GPU obviously not a bottleneck here with XSS at 1440.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it's pretty obvious it's CPU bound if the Series S can run it at 1440p. Native 4k on these consoles is demanding as we saw with Hitman earlier this gen, that now looks in restropsect quite a result at 4k 60fps on Series X at least.
 
GHG said:
Where have I seen this before... Oh yes that's right:

So you might want to wait until the game releases before tooting from the script.
Click to expand...

Not sure what that has to do with what I said lol.

The game already has an established 30 FPS cap, I'm gonna say its a safe bet we won't find out that it actually has a 15 FPS cap 2 weeks before release.
 
FoxMcChief said:
I don't think I am. I enjoyed my time with NMS. 160 hours on Xbox, 124 hours on Steam and I can't seem to find my hours played on the PS5 (I played it on PS4).

NMS has come a long way. I still talk to coworkers about it that play it in VR on PC. It doesn't seem to do most things that Starfield does.
Click to expand...
I would expect so, NMS was made by 10 people.

But they're very similar in concept regardless and have a ton of similarities. It's obvious Starfield is deeper and better but it shouldn't be a slight to compare it to NMS.
 
tmlDan said:
I would expect so, NMS was made by 10 people.

But they're very similar in concept regardless and have a ton of similarities. It's obvious Starfield is deeper and better but it shouldn't be a slight to compare it to NMS.
Click to expand...
It's not my intention to slight NMS, as I've likely put 500 hours into, 500 hours not wasted. It is my intention to put Starfield way above it.
 
Ozriel said:
Spiderman 2 didn't look THAT much different from Miles Morales to be capped at half the framerate, and is nowhere near the scope and complexity of Starfield.

People will accept it without blinking if GTA 6 is 30fps on console. I can guarantee you.



Aside from the fact that Bethesda's RPGs have been CPU and GPU intensive, Starfield and ES6 are being made on a next gen updated version of their Creation Engine.



This is extremely unlikely, especially since you'd expect most of their efforts to be focused on the already announced expansion and bug fixing.
Click to expand...

It's still the same old creation engine scaled up. Anyway enough of this back and forth. I do expect a patch for 60fps @1440p.
 
BTW, got me thinking why the fuck they couldn't keep it unlocked for those who has VRR display, makes no fucking sense.
 
DaGwaphics said:
The systems have nearly the same CPUs. What would give the XSX the ability to double the frame rate here? That extra few hundred mhz? I have my doubts.

GPU obviously not a bottleneck here with XSS at 1440.
Click to expand...
At last, someone talking sense! The bottleneck is likely going to be the CPU if XSS can display native 1440p.

It's amazing to see how many people seriously think that just dropping a few settings and the resolution will enable 60fps output. For that, I'd imagine that they would need to completely rework or even remove certain gameplay systems. It wouldn't be worth it and it would probably be a different game.
 
Not super happy with this decision, but damn the game looks good. I'll suffer the fps just as I have in the past for other great 30fps games, but I'm really hoping for an unlocked mode or 40fps mode for 120hz displays.
 
Liamario said:
Fine with it? Because it's running on a calculator maybe. Resigned to reality would be more accurate.
Click to expand...

I laughed, this is accurate. People let it slide because of the monumental effort made to make this game work and not crash every 10 steps.

Solid 30fps was the least of Nintendos problems with TOTK.
 
Destiny 1 plays fine at 30fps si imagine this will be fine on the 2 xbox consoles.

They could probably do 60fps on the series X at a lower resolution but not the S so due to it being 1st party they didn't want to make their own console look weak.

I imagine there will be a vrr option at some point although as some have speculated it's likely cpu heavy so probably doesn't matter.

Pc version will tell us.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Xbox Series sales fall 30% year on year
Business  4 5 6 7 8
372
4K
YeulEmeralda replied
Avowed to get 30/40/60 fps mode on Series X and 30/40 on Series S
49
3K
darrylgorn replied
Triangle Strategy is out now on PlayStation 5, Xbox Series X|S, and Microsoft Store with a 30% launch discount for a limited time
News  2
55
601
Fbh replied
LTTP: Hellblade 2 (Xbox Series X)
16
203
Kvally replied
Death stranding 2 30 min. 4k gameplay
2 3 4 5 6
285
5K
Karim replied
Top Bottom