you would probably spend %60 of your play time looking at loading screens.
as many as they are, they are at least quick on ssd. thats the only "next gen feature" of the game
Last edited:
-
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.
Graphical Fidelity I Expect This Gen
- Thread starter ResetEraVetVIP
- Start date
as many as they are, they are at least quick on ssd. thats the only "next gen feature" of the game
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
Gotta agree. I really wanted to like it but the game was so bad, I felt offended by the end lol.
Graphics were awesome though
amigastar
Member
It was really that bad, huh? I never played the game and probably will not ever.
GymWolf
Gold Member
Yes, it was a sad attempt of a game.
arkhamguy123
Member
Starfield has select next gen looking moments.
Basically the handcrafted stuff looks great and the procedural generated stuff looks not great
Basically the handcrafted stuff looks great and the procedural generated stuff looks not great
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
After playing some more Starfield I feel like I need to defend the visuals. Game can really look fantastic. Mars? Shit was awesome graphically. I'd even say a clear step over most games out there. Lighting, volumetrics def gave me a next gen feel. I dont find the indoor lighting to be as impressive as some of the outside stuff.
I cant say im disappointed but maybe the other planets are less hand crafted and things will go downhill?
I cant say im disappointed but maybe the other planets are less hand crafted and things will go downhill?
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
This sums things up for me too
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Interiors look amazing. Some truly great asset quality and volumetric lighting.
I still have not found a single planet that looks good.
ResetEraVetVIP
Member
Why?
ResetEraVetVIP
Member
Lethal01
Member
By rendering for just a minute per frame you can use about 1500x more power than any game out there can.
Combine that with a great artist with full control over a small project and you get amazing results that games will only dream of until 2030
Last edited:
GymWolf
Gold Member
Because it was a bad attempt to repeat ds success but with nothing of the charm or the good gameplay or map design or quality enemies etc.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
I thought the very first planet and mars looked great. Probably downgraded from trailers but still looked really great. On Mars at night i felt like the game was doing some next gen things with lighting when outdoors. However, ive been to 3 more since going to those that havn't been on that level. They still look good for a Bethesda game but nothing next gen about it.
So im expecting to occaisionally be wowed when the right hand crafted elements + ideal lighting comes together maybe 30% of the time ..?
I feel like at the very least its a big improvement for Bethesda. What's downright painful tho are the menu's, navigation of space, and ui. Its not fun going from planet to planet. It kills immersion loading screen>ship>planets>combat
Mobilemofo
Member
You think they should have done what destiny did? Use a jump into hyperspace as a load screen or something similar? Or what no man's sky does when going down to a planet? Either would have been fine.
arkhamguy123
Member
So far mars and the moon have looked pretty next Gen for an Xbox series of consoles with a 4 tflop base
There are a few other random planets I landed on that wow’d me
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
No mans sky all the way
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
You just had to remind me of that 4 tf base didn't you? I don't play on PC so I can see Starfield being more disappointing to the high end PC crowd who's experienced the likes of Cyberpunk, Witcher 3, rdr2 etc with RT out the ass.
Starfield is now in a simlar category as FF16 and Jedi Survivor, Ratchet, Forbidden West, Demons Souls. Games that at times look next gen. Interestingly, I played Metro Exodus the day before Starfield and Starfield can look even better than the RT gi in that game. Explain that ..this gen is mad confusing
arkhamguy123
Member
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
Yeah there are some boneheaded tech debts or management decisions in terms of "immersive experiences" with Starfield. For me seamless planet/space transitioning is a big one. Seeing other games do a full walk up, take off, go to orbit, travel/fast travel and then re-entry to landing on surface and exit to walking again is a drawcard. lacking this puts a dent in Starfield's experience roster for sure.
There's more to Starfield though, I'm only a few hours in and already feel bamboozled by the sheer freedom and variety of what is present. Just gotta fuck around with things and find your own path, therein lies the journey and goal.
The GI indoors and on ship is most certainly baked is why.
PeteBull
Member
That looks really good/next gen, but thats corridor shooter take, i wanna see some scope, we exploring galaxies after all, hell im waiting to play starfield in all its glory having 8700k and 3080ti, just so i can play it maxed and get full fat experience(maybe by then some texture pack mod will be avaiable too;p).
ResetEraVetVIP
Member
Awesome, this is next gen to me.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
just upgrade your cpu and you should be fine. im doing 4k 50-60 fps on my 3080 with a 11700k. High settings, fsr quality. Your 8700k actually beats out the 5800x.
13600k is like $300 and the 3rd best performing CPU in starfield. It will take you from 58 to 95 fps in CPU bound cities but frankly in GPU bound areas at high resolutions, you are probably not going to be GPU bound like me. most combat is in interiors where the game is GPU bound so its mostly a locked 60 fps there for me. Your GPU should make up for your 8700k in those scenarios.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
2030? lol. Add 20 years to that.
PeteBull
Member
I got plenty games in backlog, decided will go with whole new rig once nvidias next gpu family launches, starfield is singleplayer, with time it will only get nicer/perform better/be less buggy so im totally in 0 rushjust upgrade your cpu and you should be fine. im doing 4k 50-60 fps on my 3080 with a 11700k. High settings, fsr quality. Your 8700k actually beats out the 5800x.
13600k is like $300 and the 3rd best performing CPU in starfield. It will take you from 58 to 95 fps in CPU bound cities but frankly in GPU bound areas at high resolutions, you are probably not going to be GPU bound like me. most combat is in interiors where the game is GPU bound so its mostly a locked 60 fps there for me. Your GPU should make up for your 8700k in those scenarios.
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
This reminded me of that gif you posted of TLOU Part 1 with Joel standing into a room with spores. I was like meh. This gif is better but i am far more impressed by Starfield interiors. Especially when you board ships. Lighting looks way better.
I will record some footage and make some gifs tonight.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
That looks incredible but the only problem i have with this is that the physics don’t impact the objects in the levels. So computers, desks, chairs etc don’t react to explosions or bullets.
Imtjnotu
Member
Because they are bolted to the floor
M.W.
Member
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
FalconPunch
Member
Are we supposed to be impressed? Control did this on PS4
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
Those are my picks of best visuals. I should probably have added plague tale
Lethal01
Member
In 2030 they will stop dreaming about it and instead complain about how gamedevs are unskilled because they didn't achieve it.
TonyK
Member
And that game is also impressive, what's your problem?
Lethal01
Member
If a game is aiming for realism, achieving that realism would make it better since I don't have to be distracted by it's visuals.
arkhamguy123
Member
Oh I thought you were saying like “here are games that only look next Gen at times”
I was like FF16 and the rest yeah but demon souls to me is the most consistent of the next Gen only heavy hitters. For my money it’s currently the best looking game out
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
Another thing that's kinda nagging at me in Starfield is the moment to moment gameplay of exploration, I thought they'd give us more things to do. For example why is the scanner of such limited use?
NMS understood that something simple like scanning can turn the mundane into something interesting. There were tons of things to scan at all times which you can learn about and log those things. It's not the most exciting thing but it gives you something to do. In RDR2 we can take pictures, find animals, hunt, eat etc at any time. We can rob, steal, loot etc
Starfield wants to be this kind of game but they totally botched this aspect. A planet only has several types of rocks to mine, the scanner can't scan much of anything whether on planet, in space or inside buildings (other than highlight lootable objects). Planets seem to be too barren in that, even if there's no actual life, they shouldve still given us stuff to do and some sense of progression/accomplishment? I truly don't understand how Bethesda botched this basic design principle.
Feel Like I'm On 42
Member
Demon's is indeed the most consistently next gen
Last edited:
Lethal01
Member
Nobody asked you to, you were wrong the first time and will be wrong the second.
Last edited:
You could replicate this in skyrim and even oblivion how is that next gen?
Last edited:
Which game is this?