Abriael_GN
RSI Employee of the Year
The only thing the consumer can dictate is whether they buy the game or not.
-
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.
[Prima Games] Starfield Should Have a 60 FPS Performance Mode
- Thread starter Lunatic_Gamer
- Start date
- Opinion News Drama
The only thing the consumer can dictate is whether they buy the game or not.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Exactly. Based on feature or performance sets/options. Tale as old as time in gaming, even more so in current year.
The consumer is the main factor for making games now.
Abriael_GN
RSI Employee of the Year
Most SANE consumers base their purchase decision on whether a game is good or not. Only a very, very small (but hilariously vocal) minority of irrational internet warriors goes around counting pixels or frames, thankfully.
I can guarantee a *lot* of gamers are going to buy Starfield, and proportionally very, very few are going to care about not having a performance mode while they're having fun exploring planets and enjoying the story. The few framerate fanatics that are going to refuse to buy it because of the lack of a performance mode will be the ones missing out, and they won't be missed.
Incidentally, the following is especially ignorant and shows that the author knows *nothing* about PC gaming.
60 FPS on PC or even 30 FPS can be considered entirely acceptable or even fantastic depending on what the PC is rendering.
Consistent 30 FPS at 4K with loaded add-ons on Microsoft Flight Simulator at busy airports is finger-licking luxury. Same for 60 on Cyberpunk 2077 with full ray tracing.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Fess
Member
Yeah console gaming needs to have the full settings menu, it’s absurd that devs rather listen to people crying on Twitter demanding them to add features or increase resolution or textures etc than just having a menu where they let you click something on or off.
But if it’s about physics calculations and keeping track of all object and NPCs etc then it won’t be as easy as flicking a switch to scale it down to free up resources for 60fps. Less of everything is an option I guess but then there is a risk it’ll be like early PS4 Cyberpunk Covid version, empty.
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
Even for a low-effort opinion piece written as an excuse to rant, this is pretty weak-kneed.
sendit
Member
All your points are negated because a PC version exist. It’s inevitable that someone will try to run this game on a PC with comparable specs to Series X, modify visual fidelity options, and achieve 60 FPS.I agree. Options are in general indeed almost always good, and on PC I'm an fps elitist. But the point was that the game is backend heavy, a performance mode in this game may not have been possible without also changing the game in 30fps mode.
Could it f.ex. mean a less persistent universe? Less contemporary vfx?
Not meant for microscope use, but you can probably see they've changed the look of the game by introducing more vfx, and GI is a likely important part of that. Point is, if you've hardcoded your vfx and spent a considerable amount of CPU and GPU resources on tailoring the atmosphere of the game to your creative specs, can you imagine the pop-in and resolution reduction that you would have to implement to compensate for that.. How could you even creatively endure. And the drama it would create..
Edit: And also, XSS..
nemiroff
Gold Member
..So we're basically back to the theory that Todd is stealing the frames and keeping them at tables around the house. But yeah, I don't doubt someone will end up modding it Turok N64 style.
Last edited:
midnightAI
Banned
For me it depends on the game, it's weird, I never had an issue with 30fps until Demons Souls on PS5, something felt very off when trying to play it in quality mode, switched to 60fps performance mode and suddenly made the game feel 100% better.
However, tried games since in 30fps quality modes and again, no issue.
(My guess is it's more a frame pacing issue rather than a frame rate issue but could be wrong)
However, tried games since in 30fps quality modes and again, no issue.
(My guess is it's more a frame pacing issue rather than a frame rate issue but could be wrong)
EverydayBeast
ChatGPT 0.1
Star field is the talk right now and I’ll buy it 10 years later when it’s 5 bucks
ResilientBanana
Member
Gamers: “we want next-gen graphics!”
Gamers: “this game looks amazing but it’s only 30fps!? Unplayable, lazy devs!”
Gamers: “this game is 60 fps, but it doesn’t look next-gen, lazy devs!”
Fucking fickle Goldilocks sons of bitches, stop fuckin’ wining. Is your game library full of only graphical games, only games that are 60fps, or games that are just fun to play?
Gamers: “this game looks amazing but it’s only 30fps!? Unplayable, lazy devs!”
Gamers: “this game is 60 fps, but it doesn’t look next-gen, lazy devs!”
Fucking fickle Goldilocks sons of bitches, stop fuckin’ wining. Is your game library full of only graphical games, only games that are 60fps, or games that are just fun to play?
Last edited:
sendit
Member
It's not a theory, Todd isn't stealing frames. It's a creative choice based on hardware limitations of the Series X/S, simple as that. They wanted to hit a specific visual goal for the console and these goals won't apply to the PC version. By modifying, I meant, play around with the built in configurable settings.
Last edited:
Belthazar
Member
It's a generation with VRR, I really don't understand the point of not offering unlocked framerate as an option. If the game can run at at least 40 it should be fine, especially if you're playing on a 120hz TV.
Last edited:
feynoob
Banned
It's Bethesda. It's miracle they made the combat look that good.
xBlueStonex
Member
FFXVI has a 60fps performance mode and it's absolute trash. Framerate seems to hover around 50 at most times, 40 at the others. Is this what you want?
Roxkis_ii
Banned
Yes.
xBlueStonex
Member
Yikes. Give me a rocksteady smooth frame-paced 30fps any day.
X-Wing
Member
You have the option though, to play it at 30 if you want, or to maintain 60 fps... The frame rate issues on the demo are being wildly overstated though.
xBlueStonex
Member
Read the post above. FFXVI can't maintain 60fps to save its life, but people are praising it for having the option to play a stuttering 50fps mess. No thanks.
Edit - Just look how awful this is:
Last edited:
kikii
Member
its a demo, build 1.01 and day1 patch incoming, go play legos pls =)
nemiroff
Gold Member
And moreover it looks terrible, like a last gen game (at least where you tagged it from, didn't watch all of it).
BrutalTruth_
Banned
You're not even going to play the game, out of your own mouth
xBlueStonex
Member
Edit: Read it wrong.
Last edited:
Zathalus
Member
Almost every time I see this the full game drops and performance has increased by a few percent at best after the day 1 patch. Jedi Survivor, Elden Ring, Cyberpunk, and even Squares own Forspoken to name some examples of this.
I'm going to be really sceptical on this, especially as the resolution in performance mode already drops so low.
Roxkis_ii
Banned
BrutalTruth_
Banned
Why are you so invested?
*Edit* interesting how we can't link the comment anymore
Last edited:
Roxkis_ii
Banned
Can you quote the post? I just scanned that thread and I didn't see a post I made in it.Why are you so invested?
*Edit* interesting how we can't link the comment anymore
Does advocating for a performance mode in a current gen game on a console make you uncomfortable?
Last edited:
BrutalTruth_
Banned
I saw it earlier, as did Adam, so why can't we see it?
Roxkis_ii
Banned
So you and Adam do a lot of researching together huh? Interesting...
BrutalTruth_
Banned
Keep trolling, hilarious how you had to scrub the comment.
Mister Wolf
Member
The resolution is already sub 1440p in its standard mode. Its 1296p upscaled to 4K which is similar to FSR in Balanced Mode.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
If the game has a 1080p/1440p 60 fps mode I'd definitely play that option. But if the game is rock solid 30 fps not the end of the world.
I played my share of Bethesda RPGs on console at "up to 30 fps" and had fun. But playing these games at a boosted 60 fps is so much better. Fallout 4 had a 720p 60 fps mod on Xbox One. It was slick. Everything ran faster. Even the menu screens responded at 60 fps whereas their menu/UI screens always have a laggy feel to them.
For any of you who played Fallout 5 or Skyrim long time ago and bailed due to shitty console performance and load times, give it a try again on Series X (and I assume PS5 is the same). The games run at 60 fps right off the bat. They feel great.
Who knows. Hopefully someone releases a 60 fps mod on X.
I played my share of Bethesda RPGs on console at "up to 30 fps" and had fun. But playing these games at a boosted 60 fps is so much better. Fallout 4 had a 720p 60 fps mod on Xbox One. It was slick. Everything ran faster. Even the menu screens responded at 60 fps whereas their menu/UI screens always have a laggy feel to them.
For any of you who played Fallout 5 or Skyrim long time ago and bailed due to shitty console performance and load times, give it a try again on Series X (and I assume PS5 is the same). The games run at 60 fps right off the bat. They feel great.
Who knows. Hopefully someone releases a 60 fps mod on X.
Last edited:
THE DUCK
voted poster of the decade by bots
I missed that, where does it say it runs at 1296p?
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Member
DF did a pixel count on their Starfield analysis video.
Fess
Member
You messed up the quote, I did not say that.
Karak
Member
I did a small video on this and after talking to so many god damned devs I feel like my head is going to explode. All of them stated that beth tracks more than any games they know of. Even the Spiderman devs were rock solid that 30fps on consoles was the way to do it, especially as SOMETIMES hitting 60 isnt the same.
Will it be locked? It fucking should be for sure. But honestly, man, with all its doing and what they are TRYING to do. This one doesn't frustrate me near as much.
Will it be locked? It fucking should be for sure. But honestly, man, with all its doing and what they are TRYING to do. This one doesn't frustrate me near as much.
Last edited:
Silver Wattle
Gold Member
Just have an uncapped version running at 1080p-1440p, most people have a display that supports adaptive sync so drops into the mid forties isn't much of an issue.
CPU bound blah blah blah, there's zero proof to support that claim.
CPU bound blah blah blah, there's zero proof to support that claim.
Karak
Member
While I stopped last year, I tested tv's for years and worked with many home sellers as well as companies like Samsung and there were not NEAR
"most" tv's supporting adaptive sync in home purchasers' hands. Worse yet many supported it poorly or had other caveats. A huge number of purchasers were buying the first initial HDR tv's and while some got firmware, though that's in the customer's hands to update, many did not.
There was also a great deal of tech sway when the newer tv's coming out. Latency started getting talked about more, game modes, game modes with HDR, brightness. The consoles weren't pushing adaptive and for a time TV companies weren't either as thats not exactly in line with their first initiatives.
Though of course it would be nice as an option all that said
As for CPU bound, it is 100% bound by both GPU and CPU and ram. They run it in the worst situations and then identify where the cap/lock is. Unless people are saying they just...like don't want to run 60 or uncapped because they somehow think that's funny.
I also assume Beth now has access to the testing bed MS built as well.
Last edited:
Fess
Member
Yeah no VRR TV here, awesome TV and cost me $2k but it’s from an era when they were still trying to define what the new HDMI spec would do.
Tbh I absolutely understand the frustration here, first person shooting in 30fps is not ideal and no point going for higher resolution if they’re going to blur it up to mask the stutter so the extra pixels won’t be seen anyway.
But this is a PC game for me so I dodge this whole issue. I would advice others to go that route as well, you’ll likely want PC anyway for the coolest mods. Play the ”free” Gamepass version at launch until DF has specified what’s needed on PC to get 60fps. Then build a PC from that info.
Karak
Member
Speaking of.
I have constantly tried to get data on console mods for this from beth(timing wise). Because there are some great mods that can improve perf. Todd did discuss that they want the mod tools in peoples hands but that they are "cludgy" at first and they fix them up for modders.
But I couldn't grasp what that meant for the console side(delivery and timespan)
Last edited:
lh032
I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
you have the option to play the game in 30fps or 60fps. And no, its not "stuterring mess", you are over exaggerating here.
Starfield dont even have the option.
and lets wait until starfield release and see whether the fps actually locked at 30fps.
Would be very ironic if starfield on Xbox cant even hold 30fps locked.
Last edited:
lh032
I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
someone clearly didnt play the game.
I played the demo few days ago, it looks amazing.
every person ive seen so far that played the demo says it looks amazing as well.
Dont downplay another game to justify the 30fps on starfield.
Last edited:
X-Wing
Member
I played the demo... There are indeed parts in which the game has frame issues but those are not constant and are being addressed in a patch.
Yoboman
Member
Are you a game dev as well as a mergers and acquisitions lawyer now? Truly multi talented
TheGrat1
Member
Wanting and expecting a 60 fps mode on system that marketed that feature for a game that is primarily a SHOOTER should be entirely uncontroversial. Neither should being disappointed and voicing that disappointment. No one is trying to take away "muh fidelity" and "muh systems" away from from anyone, they just want the option.
Microsoft put themselves in that bad spot. Hyping the power of the console is one thing, everyone does that. But touting 60 fps as the standard and not even offering the option is another. As far as I can tell, the only next gen only first party game that is 60 fps on Series X is Hi-Fi Rush. A title no one is impressed by on the technical side. Anyone feel free to correct me on that, but MS not living up to their promises is on them.
Microsoft put themselves in that bad spot. Hyping the power of the console is one thing, everyone does that. But touting 60 fps as the standard and not even offering the option is another. As far as I can tell, the only next gen only first party game that is 60 fps on Series X is Hi-Fi Rush. A title no one is impressed by on the technical side. Anyone feel free to correct me on that, but MS not living up to their promises is on them.
Last edited:
daveonezero
Banned
Mobilemofo
Member
I'm a playstation guy, but from what I've seen, it certainly looks great. Game has alot of systems in place. I hope it succeeds on Xbox/pc.
Edit: thinking about it, the faces look kinda souless. Have they been downgraded?
Edit: thinking about it, the faces look kinda souless. Have they been downgraded?
Last edited:
Fess
Member
Todd said in an interview (IGN perhaps) that mods will be on console but the modding tools are on PC. Going by previous games this will limit it to the less complex mods on console where you don’t fiddle too much with files, MS will probably not allow any of the deeper mods on the Microsoft Store version either so then Steam is needed.
I’m hoping someone can make a VR mod, that would be awesome. But not sure how realistic that is. Skyrim got a dedicated VR release that modders then tweaked further with HIGGS and VRIK etc for a Alyx-like experience.